Decision of the Khoroshevsky Intermunicipal People's Court

Sects against Church (Dvorkin Proceedings)

(c) Publishing House of the Moscow Patriarchy, November 20, 2000 Chapter VII
Unofficial translation

Decision of the Khoroshevsky Intermunicipal People's Court of May 21, 1997

Khoroshevsky Intermunicipal People's Court SZAO City of Moscow composed of chairman Judge L.V. Saltykova, people's assessors N.M. Zvonkova and K.A. Kazansky with participation by advocate G.V. Lyubarska with secretaries N.A. Perlovskaya and I.N. Zhedachevska, reviewed in open court session case No. 2-1208 on the lawsuit of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, Lev Semenovich Levinson, Mikhail Semenovich Osadchev, and Nataliya Aleksandrovna Balukova against Aleksandr Leonidovich Dvorkin, Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy, with participation of the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy in the capacity of Third Party without independent claims on the part of the respondent, with participation by the public -- Committee for the Salvation of Youth -- about the defense of honor, dignity and business reputation and refutation of discrediting information.

It was established:

The Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience in the person of committee chairman Gleb Yakunin appealed to the court with a lawsuit about defense of honor, dignity and business reputation of new religious associations (non-traditional religious organizations) and about refutation of discrediting information about their criminal activities, which, in the opinion of the plaintiff, is contained in a brochure published in 1995 by the Information-consultative Center of St. Ireneaus Lyon, in the Department of Religious Education and Catechization Moscow Patriarchy under the title of "Ten Questions for Importunate Strangers, or Aid for those who would not want to be recruited," the author of which is A.L. Dvorkin, Ph.D., MDiv.

The plaintiff asked to recognize a non-correspondence to reality and a refutation in the content of A.L. Dvorkin's brochure of information about new "religious organizations, registered by the RF Ministry of Justice and legally operating on the territory of Russia," which "the author calls totalitarian sects or destructive cults" and relates "in particular, to include the Society of Krishna Consciousness, the Unification Church, the Scientology Church, the Bogorodichny Center and other non-traditional religious organizations."

Specified as not corresponding to reality and information discrediting non-traditional religious organizations, contained in Dvorkin's brochure, the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience considers the author's assertions on brochure page 2 about "religious organizations taking away material valuables (which, incidentally, sects never do without)"; the author's assertion on page 5 that a "person who comes into a totalitarian sect is constantly subject to violence: from beating and rape to exhausting, debilitative work from 15 to 18 hours daily without needed nourishment or a sufficient amount of sleep"; the brochure author's assertion on page 7 that "the goal of all totalitarian sects is to come to power. They do not strive to get there directly; they invest the means, increase their influence and make preparations to seize power. Consequently they do not burden themselves with attempts to appeal to the masses; but recruit the leadership cadre for future years"; and the brochure author's conclusion that religious organizations "do not stop at lying, stealing, deceiving people, resorting to controlling the consciousness of their brethren or, finally, defaming official and social figures who give them opposition and even physically removing people (or groups of people) who disagree with them.) In essence, we have a business with a mafia-like structure, that imposes iron discipline and implicit obedience on their leaders" (brochure p. 9).

In the capacity of substantiating the non-correspondence to reality of the information contained in Dvorkin's brochure and the discrediting of religious organizations, the Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience pleads that: it is not aware of a case in which those religious organizations, as indicated by A.L. Dvorkin, or their leaders, have been taken to criminal court to account for crimes against property, and the criminal investigation initiated more than six years ago against Aum Shinrikyo is not complete at this time and does not have official information about this organization confiscating its members valuables; in Russia court convictions are lacking that specify actions by members of non-traditional religious organizations of crimes against persons, provided for by arts. 108, 109, 112, 117 of the RF criminal code effective 1-1-97, as relates to the unsound assertions in the brochure about members of religious organizations suffering from crimes perpetrated upon them by other members of the organization; according to the Committee's information, no criminal case has been initiated and there are no court verdicts regarding any member of new religious organizations, which testify for the unsubstantiated accusations by the brochure's author about members of religious organizations making preparations to seize power; A.L. Dvorkin in the published brochure reported, "for general knowledge, socially significant information not corresponding to reality and most discrediting to new religious organizations about how they are criminal associations and that their members commit criminally punishable deeds, and that disparage the honor and dignity of an undetermined number of people -- members of religious movements and the reputations of their religious organizations."

In this way, the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience has come to court to apply for the defense of honor and dignity of an undetermined number of people -- members of new (non-traditional) religious organizations, as well as their organizations.

The publisher of A.L. Dvorkin's brochure, "Ten Questions for Importunate Strangers, or Aid for those who would not want to be recruited," is the Department of Religious Educations and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy, which (Department) holds the copyright. In connection with these legal proceedings, the Department of Religious Education and Catechization is participating in the case in the capacity of a second respondent.

In capacity of Third Party without independent claims on the side of the respondent in the case appeared the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy in the person of the Chairman of this Council and Chairman of the AOZT "Publishing House of the Moscow Patriarchy" Tikhon, Bishop of Bronnitsky, Vicar of the Moscow Patriarchy, who approved the publication by the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy of the brochure by A.L. Dvorkin, Ph.D., MDiv, manager of the St. Ireneaus Lyon Informational-consultative Center, a member of the Department's structure.

In support of the respondent against the legal demands being made of him in the court's examination participated the public -- a charitable social-educational foundation, the Committee for the Salvation of Youth.

On the plaintiff's initiative in the case appeared with independent claims, analogous to the claims of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, twenty-seven physical people, who are members of various non-traditional religious organizations, including members of the Society of Krishna Consciousness and the Scientology Church.

After the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy, in the person of clergyman Aleksei Uminsky, and the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy, in the person of its chairman, Bishop Tikhon of Bronnitsky, Vicar of Moscow Eparchy, took part in the case, the plaintiff -- the physical person (Gleb Yakunin), signified a repudiation of the legal claim, expressing a desire to not appear in conflict with the Orthodox Church. The majority of their case to be heard by the court was ended in connection with the repudiation by the plaintiff of the lawsuit, but in relation to the five plaintiffs, part of which improperly arranged the repudiation of their court claims and did not signify consent to examine the case in their absence, the court treated their court claims in a separate hearing.

As a result of this the Public Committee to Protect Freedom of Conscience turned out to be the sole plaintiff in the demand for protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of new religious organizations and in the demand for A.L. Dvorkin to refute the information discrediting them that is contained in his brochure.

Regarding the statements by the respondent that the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience is an improper plaintiff for the case and does not have the right to be satisfied by the court, the leading positions of this Committee -- full secretary L.S. Levinson and Committee director M.S. Osadchev -- appeared for reinforcement and support of the Committee's lawsuit in the case with independent claims on the same basis and the same subject. In their legal statements they indicate that "according to our religious practice," they belong to religious associations, the activities of which are described in A.L. Dvorkin's brochure: the Society of Krishna Consciousness, the Scientology Church, the Unification Church, the Bogorodichny Center (Church of the Mother of God reorganized), the Church of Christ, the "Family" Christian mission, the Church of the Last Testament, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the Jehovahs Witnesses. Plaintiffs L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev also plead that the assertions contained in the brochure about violations of legislation by religious associations (the ones mentioned above to which they belong) and their members, and about the commission of criminal acts, besmirch their honor and dignity. This disparages their reputation, and also besmirches the honor and dignity of and discredits religious associations. Therefore they ask to recognize that the information contained in Dvorkin's brochure about new non-traditional organizations does not correspond to reality.

Later in the case appeared Nataliya Aleksandrovna Balukova with independent analogous legal claims about defense of honor, dignity and business reputation and the refutation of discrediting information. She indicated in her court declaration that she practiced the religious beliefs that belong to the Church of Christ; Balukova considered A.L. Dvorkin's brochure insulting in that it implied that she was a member of a totalitarian sect. N.A. Balukova said that Dvorkin's brochure discredited her "as a believer, and the Church of Christ as a religious association, was clearly represented as a criminal society."

In the court hearing the plaintiffs -- Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev and N.A. Balukova -- provided all the support for their legal demands.

Respondents A.L. Dvorkin, Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy in the person of chairman, clergyman Aleksei Uminsky, and the Publishing Council of Moscow Patriarchy in the person of Bishop Tikhon of Bronnitsky did not recognize the legal demand about the defense of honor, dignity and business reputation of new (non-traditional) religious organizations and physical persons -- with the plaintiffs as members of these organizations -- and indicated that the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience was an improper plaintiff, and therefore did not have the right to the court's satisfaction, and also that its legal demands and legal demands of physical persons were not based in substance, and asked the court to refuse the lawsuit.

Objecting to the lawsuit, A.L. Dvorkin indicated that the Public Committee for the Protection of Conscience was an improper plaintiff, in so far as the lawsuit indicated, the protection (of honor and dignity) was not for their personal non-material benefit, but for other legal persons, for whose defense of business reputation the plaintiff had no legal right. The respondent also believes that the Committee's court claim in the part concerning the protection of honor and dignity of new religious organizations is vague, in so far as RF Civil Code art. 152 says that a legal person has a right to court protection only of business reputation, but not the protection of honor and dignity of natural persons. Besides that, religious organizations, the theme of activity of which is the spiritual life and soul of the person, do not have a business reputation (under which is to be understood an assessment of professional capacity and conscientiousness of a businessperson by other participants of the civil structure). Besides that, respondent A.L. Dvorkin contests the court claim and its essence. He pleads that realization of the RF constitutional principle of freedom of practice of belief and equal rights of religious organizations is impossible without the realization of the right to freedom of information of the people of Russia about foreign (and, similar to them, domestic) totalitarian sects, about the religious teachings they propagate, about the existence of the majority of their centers abroad, about the world-renowned violation of their members' rights that they earlier permitted and the harm they caused by applying methods of "consciousness control," about their collection of personal property, about the use of coercion on their members, about their diversion from participating in social life, about the breakups with parents etc. Registration in Russia of new foreign religious organizations, that have their centers abroad and the same teachings as them, urgently dictate the necessity of notifying the people of Russia about the dangers of these organizations, the typical totalitarian activity of which is connected with violations of human rights and has created a bad reputation for them. The Russian Orthodox Church, the attendants of which are members of society, consider themselves bound to inform people about the dangers of totalitarian sects, and they speak out against denominational anonymity. The danger of totalitarian sects is indicated in the Summary Statement of the International Christian Seminar, "Totalitarian Sects in Russia," which was signed by representatives of nineteen Russian and foreign Christian churches in May 1994. The statement was published in an attachment to the brochure, "10 Questions for Importunate Strangers." This problem is topical for governments, parliaments, courts of many nations for whom concern for human rights violations in totalitarian sects are reflected in numerous court decisions, verdicts and contemporary statements, including the European Parliament in March 1996. The right to freedom of opinion and the freedom of speech calls the respondent to freely express in the brochure and distribute his opinion and his conviction, which includes his criticism and negative valuation of the activities of non-traditional religious organizations (totalitarian sects). Throughout the world various points of view exist about the influence of totalitarian sects, about public psychic health and about assessments by religious specialists, theologians, religious sociologists, psychologists, psychiatrists and other specialists in the goals, missions and consequences of these sects. The respondent shares the opinion of those specialists, who negatively assess the activities of totalitarian sects. Therefore he believes that he had the right to lay out this opinion in a brochure. The work he signed on the basis of foreign publications, which he cited in the brochure, and all four of the stated opinions of the respondent contested by the plaintiff about totalitarian sects are based on tangible materials. All four of the opinions of the respondent contested by the plaintiff about totalitarian sects are found in the first part of the brochure, which talks about international totalitarian sects. Moreover Russian denominations registered in Russia in the capacity of independent legal persons by their adherents are not at all mentioned. The assertion by the respondent in this section about "our 'homegrown' domestic groups, like 'Bogorodichny Center' and 'Beloe Bratstvo,' are fully comparable to Scientology through their destructive consequences for personality and society," is not contested by the plaintiffs.

On this same basis A.L. Dvorkin also objects to the lawsuits of L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev and N.A. Balukova. Moreover, he pleads that in his brochure there is no information either about them personally, or about their membership in any one particular sect. Moreover, in the respondent's opinion, the legal claim of these people is farfetched, because, despite Levinson's and Osadchev's assertions, it's impossible to simultaneously practice the beliefs of completely different religions, to combine their views, goals, missions, concepts and religious principles of totalitarian sects, each of which declares itself to have the one and only Truth. The same goes for Balukova, who is said to be a member of "Society of Zealots for True Piety and for a Sober and Wise Belief in God (sect of Peter) and not a member of Church of Christ, the doctrine of which she shares only the views about missionary work (which she recognized in the court hearing.)

The chairman of the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy, clergyman Aleksei Uminskiy, does not recognize the court claim of the Committee, L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev, N.A. Balukova for the same reason as A.L. Dvorkin, and explained that the Russian Orthodox Church, a stated part of society of the Russian Federation, believes its goal is to inform the people about the dangers of foreign totalitarian sects, which have attained a bad reputation in many countries and created their branches in Russia. This brochure by A.L. was published with approval from the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy and its content fully corresponds to the Summary Statement of the International Christian Seminar "Totalitarian Sects in Russia" (May 1994).

Bishop Tikhon of Bronnitsky, Vicar of the Moscow Eparchy, representing the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy, participated in the case in the capacity of Third Party on the side of the respondent, said that his and the respondent's part in this case was consented to by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, Aleksei II, that A.L. Dvorkin's book was published by the Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, approved by the Publishing Council of the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy, based on definite material published in various countries and contained reliable information about totalitarian sects, which was shared by many foreign and domestic theologians and religious specialists, who are concerned about the violations of human rights in totalitarian sects.

Participating in the case in the capacity of public representative, the Committee for the Salvation of Youth fully supported the objections of the respondent against the lawsuit.

The court, in listening to the explanation of the sides -- Gleb Yakunin in the interests of the plaintiff -- Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, L.S. Levinson in the capacity of representative of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience; plaintiffs -- L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev, N.A. Balukova and their representatives R.A. Goncharenko in support of their personal legal claims, and also the respondent A.L. Dvorkin; clergyman Aleksei Uminskiy in the capacity of representative of the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy, and Bishop Tikhon of Bronnitsky in the capacity of chairman of the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy; M.V. Gerasimova in the capacity of representative of the public; and in questioning many witnesses on the plaintiff's side: L.V. Lazareva (St. Petersburg), I.G. Obraztsova (St. Petersburg), V.G. Kritskiy (Moscow), S.A. Bogdanov (St. Petersburg), S.M. Agirzhanokova (Moscow), S.A. Markon (Moscow), D.E. Furman (Moscow), V.I. Likhchenkov (St. Petersburg), M.S. Shterin (Moscow), K.D. Sanjit (India), N.A. Ulyanova (Moscow), A.Yu. Prozherina (Moscow), K.V. Krylov (Moscow), V.M. Tuneev (Moscow), V.I. Ivanov (Moscow), Yu.S. Savenko (Moscow), Yu.A. Rosenbaum (Moscow), V.M. Kalin (St. Petersburg), S.I. Ivanenko (Moscow), Eileen Barker (Great Britain), James Richardson (USA), and on the side of the respondents: Georgas Krippas (Greece), Ya.I. Lutsenko (Gromov) (Kiev), N.K. Russkikh (St. Petersburg), E.N. Volkov (Nizhniy Novgorod), A.G. Aizenberg (Moscow), E.I. Ryabinkina (Moscow), Sh.G. Lutfullin (St. Petersburg), A.A. Losev (Moscow Region), V.P. Maslenikov (Moscow), Yu.I. Polischuk (Moscow), M.V. Karanova (Moscow Region), G.V. Shamova (Moscow), clergyman Boris Mikhailov (Moscow), I.M. Sysoeva (Moscow), T.V. Kharlamova (Moscow), V.V. Sventilova (Moscow), V.A. Sukhotskuya (Moscow), N.V. Babkin (St. Petersburg, S.N. Suslova (Novgorod), V.S. Burenkova (Moscow), V.G. Portnov (Moscow), G.A. Kuznetsova (Moscow), V.V. Orlov (Moscow, Johannes Aargord (Denmark), Clair Champollion (France), Thomas Gandow (FRG), researching the visual material of the case, listening in on the discussion, advocate G.V. Lyubarskaya in defense of the interests of A.L. Dvorkin and the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchate, the court considers that a basis for approving the legal claims of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, of L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev and N.A. Balukova is lacking.

In accordance with RF Civil Code art. 152 a citizen has the right to demand by the court refutation of information discrediting HIS honor, dignity and business reputation if the distributor of this information can not prove that it corresponds to reality. The rule of RF Civil Code art. 152 about the defense of business reputation of the people is correspondingly applied to the business reputation of the legal person. This way the right to legal defense of honor, dignity or business reputation goes to individuals, given that distribution of their information discredits them specifically. Moreover, such nonmaterial benefit, as honor and dignity, the protection of which is granted in the court system, belongs only to the physical person, the citizen. A legal person has the right to court protection only of business reputation. As was explained in the plenum of the RF Supreme Court in the Resolution of August 18, 1992 (revised December 21, 1993 with revisions of April 25, 1995) "On several issues, arising during examination by the court of cases about defense of honor and dignity of citizens, and also business reputation of citizens and legal persons," -- on the distribution of information, disparaging to honor and dignity of citizens or business reputation of citizens and legal persons, which is explained in art. 152 pt. 1 of the RF Civil Code, is understood to be the publication of such information in print. By disparagement is meant information not corresponding to reality, containing assertions about violation by civil or legal persons of effective legislation or of moral principles (about execution of dishonest deeds, behavior improper for the labor group, and other information, disparaging production-ownership and social activity, business reputation, etc.) which lessens the honor and dignity of the citizen or business reputation of the citizen or legal person. After all, as indicated in item 4 of the above mentioned Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Supreme Court, in cases of the given category, legal persons and citizens, who consider that the distribution of THEIR information which does not correspond to reality and is disparaging have the right to bring suit.

The legal claim, in the procedure of art. 152 RF Civil Code, which is presented by the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, has no connection with information, disparaging and not corresponding to reality, as distributed in Dvorkin's brochure, and, as the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience itself recognizes, is distributed in relation to nontraditional religious organizations (new religious associations).

In accordance with item 3 page 4 RF GPK, the court set about examining the civil case according to the statement of the social organizations, for when, by law, they can turn to the court for defense of rights and interests of other persons. The Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience believes that it has the right to appeal to the court for the protection of rights and interests of non-traditional religious organizations by the power of its charter (registered with the Justice Administration of the City of Moscow on February 29, 1996) in para. 2.2 of which in capacity of one of the goals of this Committee is to provide assistance for the protection of the interests of persons who, without basis, suffer for freedom of practice of religion, are subject to persecution for this. Even the representative of the Committee -- L.S. Levinson -- believes that the right of the Committee to bring suit in defense of the interests of other persons is analogous to the right, by which the RF law "On protection of rights of consumers" applies to Union consumers, and asks by analogy to apply this law to expedite legal relations (in which sects are analogous to the consumers).

Meanwhile, proceeding from the content of art. 152 RF Civil Code, para. 4, the Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Supreme Court of August 8, 1992 (with changes) and para. 3. art. 4 RF GPK, it should be recognized that the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience does not have the legal right to turn to the court for the defense of rights and interests of other persons, and art. 152 of the RF Civil Code directly excludes the possibility of coming to court by legal persons for the defense of business reputation, if the information, which they consider does not correspond to reality, was not distributed about them, and does not disparage them.

In connection with this the plaintiff, who is a legal person, is not recognized as a proper plaintiff in this case and by virtue of this circumstance does not have the right to the court's satisfaction.

Basic attention is turned to the fact that in the course of seven weeks of court examination of new (nontraditional) religious organizations, the management and members of which were questioned in the case in capacity of witnesses, none appeared in the case in the capacity of proper plaintiffs. Moreover, the "Center of the Society for Krishna Consciousness in Russia" in a public statement of January 3, 1997 and in a letter to the Chairman of the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchate of January 30, 1997 directly indicated the absence of this Center's intention to appear in court with a lawsuit about the defense of business reputation in connection with professor Dvorkin's published work: "In the eruption of false interpretation of a report, the Russian Society of Krishna Consciousness has not given legal representation to the Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Consciousness, headed by Gleb Yakunin, to go to court in the name of the Society, to defend or represent the interests of the Society in court" (ld.3, t. 4)

The physical persons -- plaintiffs L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev, N.A. Balukova, although it was indicated in the lawsuit that A.L. Dvorkin spread disparaging information that did not correspond to reality, in so far as they were members of new nontraditional religious organizations and in the distribution of the information laid out in the brochure about the totalitarian character of sects and violations by sects of the law, -- they however acknowledged that Dvorkin did not mention their names in the brochure, and there was no indication made of them as members of totalitarian sects. There was no mention in Dvorkin's brochure, either, of which religion the plaintiffs belonged to. The reasoning of these three plaintiffs that the negative information about totalitarian sects that was disparaging to them contained in Dvorkin's book insulted them as members of sects (new religious organizations) is not able to be taken into the court's consideration, in so far as Dvorkin's work does not contain an assertion about violations by individuals -- by the plaintiffs of effective law or of moral principles, which would lessen honor and dignity or their business reputation. Therefore this court considers that the citizens who are the plaintiffs in the case at hand, do not have any relation to the information in Dvorkin's brochure and are not able to make a claim for satisfaction of their claims about refutation of disparaging information, which affects a legal person. Besides that, when these legal persons appeal in a lawsuit about the defense of their business reputation in connection with the distribution in print of information about them, they have no legal defense.

Moreover, plaintiffs Levinson, Osadchev and Balukova have not presented any evidence asserting that they are members of nontraditional religious organizations or possess any religious beliefs: Levinson and Osadchev, to nine religious associations and Balukova, to the Church of Christ. As was seen in Balukova's statement in the St. Ireneaus of Lyon Information-consultative Center, which she gave prior to her filing the present case, -- she belongs to the leadership of the so-called "Sect of Peter," -- "Society of Zealots for True Piety and for a Sober and Wise Belief in God." In connection with this statement given by the respondent in the court hearing, Balukova stated that she shares the beliefs of the "Church of Christ" only in the missionary part (missionary activity), but on the whole does not belong to the "Church of Christ." This testifies as to the improbability of the legal claim and puts it in a singular light -- to create support for the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, which does not have the right to satisfaction from the court.

These same goals, in the court's opinion, include the lawsuit of L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev, who say they simultaneously belong to the Society for Krishna Consciousness, to the Scientology Church, to the Unification Church, to the Bogorodichny Center, to the Church of Christ, to the "Family" Christian Mission, to the Church of the Last Testament (followers of Vissarion), to the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) and to the Jehovahs Witnesses -- each of which has a completely independent and exclusive current of belief and practice of religion. In the opinion of the witness questioned in the capacity of an authoritative world specialist on sect studies, prof. Johannes Aargord (Denmark), membership in all of the above listed sects in principle is impossible. Prof. Aargord commented that Jehovists would indirectly exclude such people from their organizations, Moonists never took any of the others, and Krishnatis were as isolated as they were socially dangerous people. In the opinion of other witnesses on the respondent's side, Pastor Thomas Gandow (FRG), also a recognized specialist in religious studies who has for many years studied totalitarian sects (nontraditional religious organizations), -- a person simultaneously practicing the beliefs of the above indicated completely different nontraditional religious organizations, is either a "lunatic," or an "agent" of Scientology.

In this connection attention is merited for the statement for the public made by state Duma expert Vyacheslav Polosin about his exit from the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscious in connection with him "not experiencing any devotion to the ideas or practices of the sects for which the Committee lobbies and could not imagine himself possibly defending their legal interests," in as much as be believes that the "participation of the Committee in legal defense proceedings is not right, and some of the people's interests in connection with the tactless statements in their address of ... A.L. Dvorkin's brochure are a serious mistake. Instead of correcting the admitted mistake on April 8, 1997 at the given process, it was declared that the full secretary and director of the Committee would participate in the proceedings in the capacity of plaintiffs, as believers in all the sects mentioned by A. Dvorkin (except Aum Shinrikyo and Beloe Bratstvo). As a result the situation worsened, during which the Committee, as an organization, defends in these proceedings the partial interests of their own business positions by the token of their religious preferences. The given situation testifies to the substitution by the Committee of its charter goal -- the defense of civil rights - with lobbying for the corporate interests of their managers, i.e. about the transformation of the public status of the Committee from an advocate group to lobbyists. This public transformation becomes a principle obstacle for the defense in the most remote human and civil rights, independent of the relationship to religion and religious membership, in as much as the public position of the Committee is dependent on the relations of their management positions toward a number of religions and other corporations by their interests" (l.d. 22, t. 10)

Moreover, still before exiting the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, V. Polosin in the capacity of chairman of the All-Russian Council of Christian Organizations on January 30, 1997 made a statement for the Moscow Patriarchy, in which he indicated that with the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, the "usual civil case does not have any relationship to problems of conscience. On the most critical assessment of Mr. A. Dvorkin's brochure about "recruiting and re-recruiting," none of the sectarians has the right to deprive him of his inalienable right to determine and express his personal relationship to another's religion -- this, as before, is included in the right to freedom of conscience."

This way, the statement from the Public Committee for the Protection of the Freedom of Conscience in the present lawsuit and appearance in the case with independent analogous court claims of its management staff -- full secretary L.S. Levinson and Committee director M.S. Osadchev -- evoked a negative rating both as participants of the Committee, as well as a social organization.

In this situation attention is merited for the argument of the respondent about the obviously unfounded legal claims presented by the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and supported by its management staff in connection with the developments with Gleb Yakunin's "difficult relationship with the Orthodox Church." Moreover the support by the Public Committee for the Protection of the Freedom of Conscience for the lawsuit was unconscientiously explained to the respondent by the wish of the head of this Committee, Gleb Yakunin, to draw attention to the Committee and its activity to secure a collection of victims (the Committee sent an appeal to achieve this in a letter to various organizations, including international)(l.d. 6, t. 5). The respondent did after all turn special attention to the absence of the Committee's right to satisfaction of the lawsuit even before the case was examined, however, being aware of this, the Committee did not repeal its legal claims, but involved its management staff in the case.

The legal claim is as groundless for the Committee as it is for the individuals, in its essence.

Motivating the need for bringing the lawsuit about the defense of the business reputation for new religious organizations, which in A.L. Dvorkin's work are called "totalitarian sects," -- the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and three plaintiffs -- individuals, claimed that in correspondence with art. 4 of the RF Constitution and art. 5 of the RSFSR Law "On Freedom of practice of belief" religious associations were equal under the law. The assertions contained in Dvorkin's brochure about the violations by new religious associations of effective law -- confiscations of people's material valuables; about people going into a totalitarian sect being continually subject to beatings and rape; that all totalitarian sects are preparing to seize power and have a mafia-like structure, which will not stop at removing people or groups disagreeable to them -- were said to contradict constitutional principles: in correspondence to articles 14, 19 of RF Constitution guarantees equal rights and freedom for people and citizens regardless of relationship to religion; art. 29 of the RF Constitution guarantees each person freedom of opinion and of speech, excepting propaganda or agitation instigating religious discord and enmity. In the opinion of the plaintiffs, in spite of this constitutional guarantee of civil rights, A.L. Dvorkin's work was directed at propagation of religious superiority of a traditional confession over new religious movements, which would lead to religious intolerance and incite enmity toward totalitarian sects.

At the same time, the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and plaintiff L.S. Levinson recognized that "in no measure is there a doubt as to the right of the Russian Orthodox Church and each of its members to publicly express their attitude fot one or another religious association, and they (Committee and Levinson) agree that the religious assessment of these could be extremely negative," and they believe it "absolutely impermissible to limit the freedom of expression of the church on religious issues, including the right of Orthodox men and women to express their position in relation to non-Slavic confessions." That is why "the Committee does not contest Dvorkin's right to have his position in relation to other religious associations and freely assess those religious associations negatively, from religious, social, political or other positions and consider that the activity of Dvorkin and anticult organizations on the whole does not contradict the law and should be freely realized" (l.d. 66, t. 10).

Besides that the plaintiffs recognize that polemics about new religious movements is opportune and needs to have a place, in so far as different points of view exist on the influence of new religious practices on the public's psychic health. They do not dispute that the contents of Dvorkin's brochure on the whole, nor that it contains negative and critical information about non-traditional religious organizations, but plead that "they are defending religious associations from accusations of committing the unlawful crimes mentioned in the lawsuit" (l.d. 67, t. 10).

In the opinion of the plaintiffs, since up to now in Russia convictions in relation to religious nontraditional organizations registered in the RF are lacking, it is not permissible to talk about violence applied in them, about confiscation by them of their members' possessions, about striving for power and about the mafia-like character of their activity. After all, even the existence of convictions in relation to sect members, in the plaintiffs' opinion, would not testify to the criminal character of the activities of the sects themselves, even if this criminal activity were committed by sect leaders. In as much as these convictions in relation to new religious organizations, registered in the Russian Federation, do not at all exist, the plaintiffs believe that by the power of art. 49 of the RF Constitution, which formulates the presumption of innocence in activities up to the present, guilt was not established by the court's sentence going into effect -- A.L. Dvorkin's opinion about the criminal character of the activity of totalitarian sects would not correspond to the activities, it would discredit new religious movements.

According to the plaintiffs' assertions, new foreign religious organizations registered in Russia are independent legal persons, even though they have the same managing center abroad and the same belief as the corresponding leading international religious organizations on which each one of them is based. Regarding this the plaintiffs believe that the negative facts of activities and the bad reputation abroad of the international religious organizations (belonging to new religious movements) or their managers or members -- cannot automatically be distributed among each member of the organizations, newly created in Russia.

At the same time the plaintiffs recognized that in all four of the assertions that they contest made by A.L. Dvorkin about totalitarian sects, the names of the foreign non-traditional religious organizations registered in Russia, such as the "Center of the Society for Krishna Consciousness in Russia," "Scientology Church Moscow," "Unification Church (Holy Spirit Association for the unification of world Christianity) in Russia" and others are not at all mentioned.

Recognizing also that in many countries the reputation of international new religious movements has developed as dangerous for their members, associated with commission of crimes and violations in them of human rights, -- the plaintiffs are not able to explain why exactly they believe that the information about this, which is contained in the four statements of Dvorkin's that they contest, is disparaging for the local branches of these same non-traditional religious organizations, which operate on Russian soil.

Claiming to protect the reputation of all new religious movements registered in Russia (which the author of the brochure "Ten Questions for Importunate Strangers", A.L. Dvorkin, called 'totalitarian sects' or 'destructive cults'), the Committee does not make an exclusion for "Aum Shinrikyo" or "Beloe Bratstvo" (the former associated with mass murder; the latter with a scheme to commit mass suicide), the activities of which already have a bad reputation in Russia.

At the same time, plaintiff N.A. Balukova believes that only the information about the criminal activity of the Church of Christ is disparaging and subject to refutation.

During settlement of the case the court was guided in essence by the constitutional principles of the Russian Federation -- equality before the Law of religious associations (art. 14), equality of the right and freedom of persons and citizens regardless of relationship to religion (srt. 19), protection by the state of the dignity of the person (art. 21), the right of each person to defense of his honor and good name (art. 23), freedom of conscience guaranteed to each person, freedom of practice of religion, including the right to practice individually or together with others of any religion or to not practice with them, and to freely choose, have and distribute religious and other convictions and to act in according with them (art. 28), freedom of thought and speech guaranteed for each person (para. 1 art. 29), impermissibility of being forced to express his opinion and conviction or refusal from them (para. 3 art. 29) impermissibility of propaganda and agitation of religious superiority, or inciting religious discord or enmity (para. 2 art. 29), the right of each person to freely seek, attain, transmit, manufacture and distribute information by any legal means (para. 4 art. 29 RF Constitution).

During this the court proceeds from the concept, that the realization of constitutional rights and freedom of each should not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons. This constitutional principle, consolidated in item 3 art. 17, has important meaning for the guarantee of normal life activities of the public and of each person.

It determines the boundaries of freedom of choice and realization by the individual of his constitutional rights, as a result of which the whole system of rights and freedoms are arranged in such a way, as to guarantee the legal interests of people and avert the possibility of lessening their rights and freedoms as a result of malice either on the part of individual people or legal persons (including religions).

In connection with this the argument of the respondents merit attention -- A.L. Dvorkin and the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchate, and also the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchate and the Committee for the Salvation of Young, about new religious organizations, in which they consider that "totalitarian sects (destructive cults)," in luring Russians into membership, violate the constitutional rights of citizens to the freedom to receive information about these new religious organizations, their beliefs, their place in the religious movement and whether they practice secret doctrine and have various stages of enlightenment in their teachings.

It was exactly for that reason, as A.L. Dvorkin himself explained, and also the representative of the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchate, clergyman Aleksei Uminskiy and Bishop Tikhon of Bronnitsky, -- that the publication of the brochure was implemented by the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy with approval from the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchate with a single goal -- to inform citizens of Russia, who do not know about the activities of sects which are totalitarian, and therefore dangerous to them, about the enlistment of recruits by new religious organizations of citizens into their number and to caution them about the unconsidered entry into non-traditional religious organizations, which could be connected with causing harm to the life and health of citizens, destroying their families, separating them from children, taking away their possessions, and inflicting violence upon them.

During this the respondent justifiably accentuated the constitutional principle of freedom of practice of religion not being realized in a democratic society when freedom of choice of practice of religion does not correspond to freedom of attaining sufficient information about the true intentions, about the religious teachings, the goals and missions of non-traditional organizations and methods of their activity in relation to citizens lured into their organizations, especially when non-traditional religious organizations use the name of Christ and the term "church" for the name of their organization. This complicates the understanding of the citizens of Russia, as to what kind of religious organizations they are getting into.

The published brochure of A.L. Dvorkin is directed at suppressing violations of human rights in sects by means of sending and distributing authentic information about them in Russia, at what kind of reputation in the world association that international non-traditional religious organizations (which registered themselves in Russia) have; at the destructiveness of their cults; at the violence they applied to their members, at the taking of their possessions and at the criminal activities of both the sects themselves and of the leaders or members.

The right of A.L. Dvorkin and the Moscow Patriarchy in the person of the Department of Religious Education and Catechization and the Publishing Council to distribute this information is based on the constitutional principle of freedom of speech, the freedom to expression one's opinion and the right to distribute information (art. 29).

Dvorkin's brochure was written from the materials of many books that have been published in many countries, which is explicitly indicated in his brochure ("(Material used in developing this text came from Steven Hassan's book, Combating Cult Mind Control,"), and also in footnotes: on p. 9 ("Time" magazine of 1991; book by J. Haber and L. Gruson "Monkey on a Stick"; Zh.F. Buaya's book "Empire of Moon", which contains the chapter "Moonist Mafia"); Jean Ritchey's book "Secret World of Cults" on p. 10; the Moonist newspaper on p. 8. Consequently, the information forwarded by A.L. Dvorkin in the brochure about non-traditional religious organizations that have a totalitarian character was based on material, which had already been published in various countries at various times and which are not contested by non-traditional religious organizations. The content and accuracy of these sources is not being contested by the plaintiffs themselves.

Moreover, the information contested by the plaintiffs about totalitarian sects laid out by Dvorkin in brochure's introduction: "Totalitarian Sects and Freedom of Conscience," which mentions the Society of Krishna Consciousness, Scientology, the Moonists (Unification Church), and also indicates that "some of our domestic 'homegrowns,' like the 'Bogorodichny Center' and "Beloe Bratstvo' are fully comparable, through their consequences that are destructive to personality and society, to the Scientologists." Dvorkin does not name the non-traditional organizations registered in Russia as legal persons with headquarters abroad in the brochure. According to Dvorkin's assertions, in the text of the introduction he used the activities of foreign (international) new religious organizations: such as the Society for Krishna Consciousness, but not the "Center for the Society of Krishna Consciousness in Russia"; "Scientology", but not the "Scientology Church Moscow"; Moon's "Unification Church" but not the "Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity in Russia," etc.

The activity of non-traditional religious organizations in many countries was, after all, recognized as being connected with violating human rights and committing criminal acts, both upon their adepts and others, and were subjects of debate not only for law enforcement agencies, but for state legislators and associations.

For instance, the European Parliament in a session of February 12, 1996, in discussing the question of the violation of human rights in non-traditional religious organizations, confirmed their inclination for the basic principles of a legal democratic state, as well as tolerance, freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of opinion, freedom of association and assembly, and recognized that certain sects, the organized structure of which is not limited to one country and which operate throughout the entire European Union, constantly violate human rights and commit criminal acts. In their list they included: "ill treatment of people, sexual solicitations, illegal deprivation of liberty, trafficking in people, instigation to violence, distribution of racist viewpoints, tax evasion, money laundering, trafficking in weapons and drugs, violation of labor laws and illegal practice of medicine." In connection with this the European Parliament stated that "it considers that freedom of opinion, conscience and religion, and also freedom of association, should exist within limits, which determine the necessity to regard freedom and individual life of the person, and also the necessity to defend him or her from actions like torture, inhumane treatment dehumanizing to human dignity, use of slavery, etc." Therefore the European Parliament appealed to "member states to check, whether their enacted tax, criminal and judicial laws were sufficient to avert the possibility of the commission by such groups of activity contrary to rights," and it called for governments of member states, not to give the status of religious organization automatically, but in cases when the talk is about sects, which are involved with illegal or criminal actions, to consider the possibility of depriving them of the status of religious association, which guarantees them tax exemption and legal defense. The European Parliament invited the Council of Europe to use existing legal norms to limit and suppress illegal sect activities; the Council of Europe called to increase cooperation among member states of the Union and third countries with the purpose of organizing a search for disappeared people and easing their return back to society; called for the European Commission and member states to prevent the possibility of sects receiving state aid; authorize a special committee to develop better methods for revealing the undesirable activities of these sects, and also a strategy to inform the public about them (l.d. 41, t. 6).

These conclusions and resolutions of the European Parliament have as much significance for Russia as they do for members of the Council of Europe.

The National Assembly (Parliament) of France on December 22, 1994, published an extensive document, "Sects in France," which contains concern that "an increasing number of adepts often get completely involved in a new religious movement right up to the point of loss of part of their identity (individual personality). Exactly here the risk of distortion becomes serious, when the involvement of the adepts and the absolute trust in the sect leads to them, in order to stop worrying about themselves, having to break off connections with family and give the sect all the money they have. Intervention by state authorities is urgently needed when such involvement leads to psychological dependency, which sect managers use to exploit their selfish goals. Court resolutions made over the past years clearly indicate that many of them are recognized as guilty of breaking laws from extortion and fraud to oppression, inflicting physical harm and forced isolation." In connection with this the National Assembly of France has recognized that the "state cannot continue to develop if in its depths attentive examination reveals true distress. Remaining passive would have actually not only been irresponsible to the people affected or those fallen under the influences of sects, but dangerous to democratic principles as well (l.d. 136-145, t. 9).

The Commission for the Investigation of Sects in France, the conclusions of which the National Assembly of France discussed January 10, 1996, gave the following definition of sects: "Groups, identified through their manipulation, which is directed toward the psychological destabilization of their adepts with the goal of attaining from them unquestioning obedience, decreasing critical spirit, breaking away from social accepted recommendations (ethical, scientific, civil, general educational) and bringing into danger individual freedoms, health, education and democratic institutions. These groups use philosophical, religious or therapeutic masks to conceal the goal of obtaining power, influence and exploitation of adepts" (l.d. 137, t. 9).

Signs of a sect, as the National Assembly of France noted, are: psychic destabilization, under which is implied conscious activity, manipulation or any other material means with the goal of destabilizing someone to gain an influence over them. According to the given general research in France, 172 sectarian movements resort to such practices. General research has established that psychic destabilization of adepts can take very diverse and veiled forms, as illustrated by the personality test and auditing, which are Scientology offerings. Special attention is directed to the fact that this practice is very insidious, because it's an apparency of being progressive and having a scientific basis and is done with the agreement of the victim in a perfectly legal framework. On a level with this are used methods that are more flagrant. They are directed at weakening the person by creating for him or her a very harsh discipline or lessening critical spirit to force him or her to action or repetitious prayer, attaining complete obedience as a result. Testimony obtained about a typical daily routine for an adept of the International Society of Krishna Consciousness, with his eleven-hour workday and six hours of prayer daily, testifies to this. Such methods sometimes lead adepts to a state of progressive pathological asthenia. It's also been confirmed, though in rarer cases, that sofrological techniques can lead to deep hypnosis in which the adept experiences mental "flying." In connection with this general research has established that "these forms of psychic destabilization can have serious consequences affecting the psyche of those they are used upon in ways such as depression, schizophrenic deviation or a state of heavy dependency" (l.d. 136-145, t. 9).

The National Assembly of France on the basis of general research came to the conclusion that "some sects have demands for excessive payments." According to general research, this affects 76 sects. This also relates to the Church of Scientology, which extracts payments for some courses of a sum of more than 70,000 franks, in connection with which many witnesses, who have indicated to the committee of inquiry that the Church of Scientology puts many adepts in serious long-term straits. The same thing relates to the Association for the Unification of World Christianity (Moon's Church), which demands from 7,000 to 14,000 franks from each of 72,000 persons who participated in a joint wedding ceremony, which Reverend Moon performed in Seoul. It also noted a fracture of adepts from their immediate environment at the sect's insistence. "This is where more is concealed, the followers who are really in the framework of sects, but who outwardly continue to carry on a normal family and social life, and whose participation in the movement, in whom they appear as members, leads them to consequently fracture all real relations from the external world. And it is exactly this goal that sect leaders wish to attain, inducing adepts to dedicate the greatest amount of their time to the sect, to its rituals and its practices: forcing them to break all contacts with people who were in a position to place a doubt in the adept's mind, to spur on critical feelings and, ultimately, to turn him or her away from the sect. According to the information gathered by the Commission, 57 spiritual movements present this danger. Among them are the Church of Scientology, Jehovahs Witnesses, the 'Family' and others" (l.d. 136-145, t. 9).

The National Assembly of France also recognized that the "practice of certain sects contains a threat to the physical well-being of their adepts. According to research conducted by the Commission, 82 sects present this threat for their members. Here the discussion is about oppression, blows and wounds, deprivation of liberty, about failing to provide people in danger with assistance or about illegal practice of medicine, and also about sexual aggression." So, "under the protection of the "Children of God" sect, prostitution and incest were practiced." An adept participated in the practice of "flirty fishing," which consists of prostituting children "with deliberate intention of attaining more followers and to obtain support." Self-disbanded in 1978, this sect was recreated under another name, the "Family," under which the sect association generally operates today.

The National Assembly of France particularly accentuated the large-scale dramas happening in sects connected with collective suicide. Eighty-eight members of the Branch Davidians, who died as a result of suicide or as a result of confrontation with the police in Waco, Texas in 1993; 53 members of the Solar Temple sect, who died as a result of suicide or killed in Switzerland and Canada October 4, 1994; 11 died and five thousand wounded in a Tokyo subway during a poison gas attack organized by the AUM sect March 5, 1995, and the collective suicide of 923 members of the People's Temple in Guyana in 1978

The National Assembly of France in its paper about sects comes to the conclusion that recruitment of children takes place in 28 sects. Enlistment of children is practiced in Jehovahs Witnesses, Association of the Unification of World Christianity (Moon), Church of Scientology Paris, the French Federation of the Society of Krishna Consciousness, the "Family" and others. In this is particularly emphasized the danger of sects for the collective and their anti-social character. "Movements which obviously form practices counteracting the law or social morals cover them up. They often explain to their adepts that these laws and morals are foolish and that only the principles of the sect are worthy of their practice." In connection with this a conclusion was drawn that 46 organizations (sects) have an anti-social character and by general research, among those named are the French Federation of the Society of Krishna Consciousness, the "Family," and others.

It was also recognized that many sectarian organizations provoke violation of social order. This touched 26 sects, which included Jehovahs Witnesses, Church of Scientology and the French Federal of the Society of Krishna Consciousness.

Some sects habitually practice litigiousness. The commission confirmed, for instance, that the "majority of people who took auditing and who publicly spoke about the negative effects of some sect movements, were taken to court by them for distributing false information. The Scientology Church has the custom of appearing in exactly this way, but on the whole local courts refuse their pleas" (l.d. 136-145, t. 9).

The Commission also discussed the fact of infiltration or attempt at infiltration into the depths of government offices, undertaken by sects.

The Consultative National Commission on Human Rights in its decision of December 10, 1993, in referring to the phenomena called sects, made a proposal to "put forward a structure to coordinate among ministries, realize legal measures and create a Center of Public Information, which gathers and distributes all the information about sects and guarantees legal support for the victim."

After all, as noted in the National Assembly of France, this idea was on the whole supported in the realm of the Commission for Legal Issues and Human Rights in the Council of Europe (l.d. 144-145, t.9)

In connection with them the National Assembly of France underscored that court decisions made over the past year clearly indicate that "many of them (sects and their management) have been recognized as guilty in legal violations ranging from extortion and fraud to oppression, inflicting physical harm and forced isolation." "The discussion is mainly about legal violations pertaining to physical encroachment on the person: atrocities, inflicting bodily harm, beating, illegal deprivation of liberty, refusal to render assistance to people in danger, or malpractice of medicine." In this a reference was made to the decision of the Supreme Court of Versailles of 8 and 9 February, 1995 in which managers of the "Citadel" sect were found guilty, among other things, of violent acts upon minors, larceny and deprivation of liberty. The Supreme Court of Dijon on January 9, 1987 recognized as guilty the director of the Narconon Center, city of Grangey-sur-Ource, of not rendering assistance to a person in danger. This center, created by the Church of Scientology, offers courses to cure an organism of substances accumulated in the body, using the methods of Ron Hubbard, specifically, the "purification" procedure, consisting mainly of many hours of sitting in the sauna each day, taking "auditing" and taking significant doses of vitamins. A person, who turned out to be a victim, over the course of a long time was cured of epilepsy and turned to this organization with a wish to be freed of his medication. In the Center without a certified medical exam he was put in a state depriving him of vital substances, and medical expert testimony indicated that the death of this person arose "in a state of epileptic seizure caused by absence of needed medication in the beginning and extraneous medicine during the medical crisis." In connection with this Supreme Court of Dijon recognized that there was not the least doubt that the responsibility for this was that of this Center of Scientology. Noting that in the last year many cases of illegal medical practice have been observed, the National Assembly of France indicated that "on the same level as this were heard many guilty verdicts on the subject of violation of family obligations. This concerned the relations to children of parents who had become members of sects."

It was also established that "sects were at fault in distributing false information, libelous denunciation, and violating the rights of an individual's life. And this particularly affected the Church of Scientology." It was noted that "the Supreme Court of Paris on October 13, 1993 was found guilty of libelous behavior in the publication 'Ethics and Freedom,' one of the magazines of the Church of Scientology." It was also indicated that the appellate court of Douai on March 18, 1982 (No. 302) found the Hubbard Center of Dianetics guilty of distributing false information on the same level as inflicting harm. The fact was confirmed of evasion by various sects of paying taxes and indicated that the Constitutional Court affirmed the verdict of June 25, 1990 of the Paris Appeals Court decision of January 1988, accusing the president of the Association of Unification of World Christianity, which is the French branch of Moon's sect, of evading payment of taxes. Also recognized as guilty of tax fraud were the International Association of Krishna Consciousness and the Church of Scientology.

In the mentioned document of the National Assembly of France was also noted that in sects "many cases of fraud, extortion, abuse of trust, violations of labor and social security rights."

The conclusions of the National Assembly of France about the danger of sects in France for persons and state were based on informational documents from the Inquiry Commission, registered in the Presidium of the National Assembly December 22, 1995, and also by presentations and other documents, including court convictions that took place in the period from 1982 to 1995. The authenticity of the documents presented in court, certified in the Embassy of France, was also subjected to testimony on the respondent's side by Prof. Claire Champollion (France).

Correlating the conclusions of the European Parliament and the National Assembly of France with the information produced in A.L. Dvorkin's brochure about the danger of totalitarian sects: about the collection by sects of their adepts' possessions, having them beg, and inflicting violence upon them: from beating and rape to grueling work without necessary nourishment or a sufficient amount of sleep, about the psychic destabilization of adepts, about the sects' endeavors to power and antisocial orientation to the fracture of adepts with close associates and isolating them from society -- the court comes to the conclusion that the conclusions of the European Parliament and the National Assembly of France about totalitarian sects are analogous with A.L. Dvorkin's opinion about them.

This fact by itself testifies to the correspondence of reality of the information about non-traditional religious organizations laid out in A.L. Dvorkin's book for informing the public about the dangers of totalitarian sects with the goal of securing the citizen's right to freedom of information and creating freedom of choice in practice of religious belief. Moreover, the danger of the (national) branches of non-traditional religious organizations is indicated in the court findings of many countries.

For instance, it was established by the verdict of the Milan Appellation Court (Italy) of November 5, 1993 that Scientology represented a criminal association. The court found the condition of criminal "fraud in relation to helpless people" in a feeble state of mind, established by the conclusion of expert or other medical documents, and also influence by members of the organization on people by persuasion for obtaining financial payment to the profit of Scientology. Established was the condition of criminal "fraud" in all episodes, when members of the organization were guaranteed (physical) recovery, although cure was extremely improbable, or when promised a full refund of money in case the cure was without result, but then, however, reimbursement became very difficult to obtain. Established was a condition of criminal "fraud" when guilt was exerted on victims of moral pressure and they were cowed to break their resistance and even against their will to obtain money for the organization's profit. "Members of the organization perpetrated crimes upon people who had turned for help to the Institute of Dianetics, which later became the Church of Scientology. This fact was extremely instructive in and of itself, because in no other organization, having not only legal, but even charitable goals, has this fact been established." In connection with this the Milan Appellation Court recognized as incorrect the conclusion of the tribune about the above-indicated criminal act being seen as a unique case, that is outside their common understanding, and only as a misguided action of an individual member of the association, (the person) who exclusively on his own initiative undertook illegal activity against people in the organization. The Milan Appeals Court established a connection between the above-indicated activities and concrete results of a directive of Scientology management. The Milan Appeals Court rejected the objection of the defense that a religion was being brought to court only because it differed from the officially recognized religions and that this case served to limit the constitutional right to freedom of association only for one definite religious practice and that ostensibly the court could not control religious activity of an organization or pronounce judgment about it, in keeping with the Constitution, in as much as such an investigation would be an impermissible interference into the freedom of religious practice. In connection with these objections the Milan Appeals Court, in rating Scientology as a criminal association, underscored that "the court in no way intended to call the Church of Scientology into account for its opinions or definite forms of activities (for example, auditing sessions, purification course or other courses) or to be involved in innermost meaning, which these practices might have. On the contrary, the court sees its mission as verifying whether the methods of the above-named forms of activity are compatible with the legal system. In other words, it should be checked as to whether, in applying these methods, an individual person's right, legally protected to the same extent, was violated, so as to protect from illegal abuse, and also whether the individual person was deprived of all his property in a criminally punishable manner. The defense of rights of an individual person, and consequently, also of the Scientology organization, undoubtedly limits the protections of others, but in the same degree of legal interests. The western type legal system, although it allows an association under the name of "Scientology" to recognize itself as a religion and at the same time to gather adherents, and also to offer them at a fee courses and sessions for transmitting reports of their experiences, however, in accordance with the legal system, it's not allowed for an association to exploit helpless people of good motivation, to threaten them or to inflict violence upon them or renege on all contracts with the goal of obtaining large sums of money which it would not have received any other way. If it's established that this criminal activity was committed in accordance with plans made in advance and on the basis of instructions to the group by association leadership, then recognizing a circumstance of a criminal "formation of a criminal association" is unavoidable, and what's more, is independent of whether Scientology is a religion." The Milan Appeals Court even emphasized that people who turn to the Scientology organization did not have the slightest conception that Scientology was a religion. In the verdict the Milan Appeals Court made a reference to a statement by witnesses, one of whom specifically brought attention to the name "church" and demanded an explanation, since his son was a devout Catholic. To this question was received the answer that the "name "church" was chosen only as a veil, and the organization did not have anything in common with a church." Independently of whether the people appearing in the Scientology organization believed it a religion or not, in history one can find examples of organizations that have all the signs of a religious association and at the same time signs of a criminal association. As indicated in the mentioned verdict of the appeals court, "during the investigation behavior of members of the Scientology organization and examination of whether this behavior was connected to an existing criminal association, the discussion was not about establishing or presenting the opinions of this organization as philosophical, religious, purely cultural or whether the opinions did not have signs of these. For the legal system it was completely inessential whether it was called a religion based on 50-year-old teachings by Ron Hubbard (in the verdict of the Trento Appeals Court of March 27, 1990, in which the defense enlisted support for its assertion to call Scientology a religion), in as much as the legal system in any case defends all doctrines, and also the right to free expression of opinion. The single question submitted to the court for investigation and resolution concerned the methods which Ron Hubbard's followers in Italy used for distributing their ideas and obtaining new adherents, and about whether those Scientology methods and activities took the shape of a criminal character and whether they were a result of an agreement the organizers made in advance and the result of instructions which they gave." The Milan Appeals Court recognized that there could be no doubt as to the true essence and character of the organization that Hubbard founded, which does not have the right to pass its activity off as exclusively philanthropical, directed at people's good. From the established obligation of a gift by members of Scientology of money for services by this organization and the increase of monthly profits from gifts by ten percent, the court recognized that "nothing so bluntly contradicts the principle of a free gift as the obligation for the giver to spontaneously give the exact amount of remuneration as that specified in advance for each rendered service, or even an exactly established size of a mandatory gift to begin with. This gift should not have an added meaning that also shows a carefully considered level of increase in price (the same thing was also established in "Narconon" centers, in which the prices for drug addicts' lodging was also shown as a mandatory gift of a precisely calculated size.)"

The court came to the conclusion that the basic interests of the Scientology organization were directed at the material potential of those who were interested in its professional services, and what number of professional services offered by the Dianetics Institute was directly dependent on the monetary resources of the client: as long as the client still had money, he was constantly recommended to take all the new courses over again as needed to keep him from suffering from an ailment, whether he was spasmodic, like A, epileptic like B or suffered from severe arteriosclerosis, like the woman witness C, or had mental illness like D, E and F. On the other hand, if the client no longer had any money, no matter how serious the ailment was, not a single Scientologist would be inclined to help him. In connection with this, the verdict of the appeals court emphasized that one of Hubbard's instructions reads: Perhaps you want to know my secret. My answer to any financial problem is that I make money. I will teach you how to make a pile of money for the organization. Give out money at a mad pace and make money. In finances you need to be clever. There is only money. Money needs to be made. And if you make money, you can have money. If you do not make money, you cannot have money. Money is not simply waiting to be picked up. In the verdict the court indicated: "The fact that the clients (as the organization designates them) represent an interest only in the aspect of their possessions, as a source of money, who were to be squeezed to the last drop, was confirmed by cards discovered in the organization." It was obvious from the cards that the clients were sorted out by economic potential and status of those near to them, and also by the way the largest amount of money possible was wheedled from them. On these cards, "kilogram" was used to designate the numerical amount, "million." Testimony was given about this in reference to the verdict on the actual entries on the cards: "He owns ten kilograms of state paper that can be disposed of. Handle strictly;" "She already paid ten kilograms. She has nothing in the bank, but she can still sell her house, which costs nearly 100 kilograms, besides that, she has a real estate parcel;" "She has ten kilograms of state paper in the bank. She was a drug addict. She needs to be pushed in every way;" "His parents have a small company and he quarrels with them. Handle crudely;" "He has nearly 18 kilograms on account, enough to pay for the whole academy. Don't let go until right before death;" "She wants to leave work and is ready to pay for academy. Ask again and don't let go;" "She wants to buy herself a house (60 kilograms), this should be prevented -- she should pay for academy;" "Works in the public sector and earns little. Influence him to get money;" "Fat takings and ready to do anything for daughter. He has money;" "Does not work, but always has a check book handy;" "Needs to get a bank loan. At the same time need to manipulate him because he hasn't wanted to do that for a long time."

The Milan Appeals Court also came to the conclusion that "members of the organization in their zeal sell as large amount as possible and as expensive as possible to the maximum number of people their services, and do not stop at exploiting the weaknesses of people who turned to the organization and even use a measure of coercion on them, that is practice depressive measures, having in mind breaking down the resistance of unfortunate people who after initial contact with the organization try to leave or, in extreme cases, do not pay for more expensive courses." The court also recognized it as established that the Church of Scientology found it easy to make completely unfulfillable promises to seriously ill people about their cure and convalescence with the goal of collecting money.

In analyzing the collection of information on the case, the court of Milan recognized that the "activity of members of Scientology consistently led to a series of crimes committed according to a single scenario, and depending on the degree of resistance rendered; in particular -- this abuse of the helpless by fraud and extortion. All this criminal activity was committed with the goal of selling all possible services to everyone who came to the center, and getting as much money as possible to flow into the organization's coffers." In connection with this, the court recognized "as proven, that this criminal activity was planned and stipulated by them from the beginning, and that the plan was put together according to instructions of the group of managers in Italy. The above-described criminal activity was developed and implemented with the aid of branches of the Scientology structure, that is the organization centers, granting of required means and distribution of tasks. From this the conclusion can be made about a real criminal organization."

The Appeals Court of Milan also corroborated that the "fulfillment of so-called intentional criminal activity by Scientology was expected and planned, and was even permanent (that is not dependent on defined incentives), since it was decided: to indiscriminately include people suffering from weak-mindedness (easy pickings for fraud); to use the principle of so-called "hard sell"; to remove at any price any resistance (deliberately repressive behavior); and to give a guarantee of refund of money, knowing in advance that refund was practically impossible, why here is ample proof of fraud. In the given case elements (independent of whether the individuals accused knew that they by decisive means enabled the formation of this association) of the mixture of criminal conduct existed, like "formation of a criminal society." The authenticity of documents, officially certified by the Bundestag (Parliament) of FRG, was also corroborated by a witness on the side of the respondent, Pastor Thomas Gandow (FRG) (l.d. 55-109, t.6).

For an analogous negative rating of the organization's activity, professed in Greece about the views of Scientology founder Hubbard and the "Center for Applied Philosophy of Greece" was given in the Athens court in the first instance in a decision of October 7, 1996 (date shown inaccurately: the decision of the Athens Court was issued December 20, 1996). This court decision dissolved the organization of the name "Center for Applied Philosophy of Greece." The court established that the basic substance and goal of this organization, in applying Hubbard's views, were power and money, about which Hubbard said, Your ability to control a person obliges you to control many, and no one is able to be a professional Scientologist if he is not able to control another person; Only the powerful survive, only the steadfast can conquer the world. His motto was "Make money." The mentioned decision of the Athens court established that "moral and just for Scientologists is that which enables the spread of their theory and that which does not oppose them. Any reaction or resistance is confronted as potential source of problems, which demands a special approach.

Any negative statement made about Scientology develops into an act of political "death" of an agent in the sense of undermining his reputation and neutralizing the attack with the goal of weakening resistance. Those who leave the organization experience trouble with constant telephone calls, the goal of which is to turn them back to the past, and on the other hand, to settle the score with enemies and traitors. The theory this organization applies and the practice that it follows is to remove any concept of the person's freedom, the freedom to express his opinion and the constitutionally established freedom of association. The organization develops closer ties to candidates, mainly people of a young age with impressionable minds in order to have them join without resistance, and people who express bewilderment and ask questions regarding the organization's activity are driven off as undesirable. Candidates for the organization complete the so-called Oxford personality test, which contains 200 questions and, as a rule, ascertain a problem with the candidate's communication. This necessitates further contact for him with the organization and visits for payment to lessons and seminars with the goal of "improving personality and relations." For each program and for all that is connected with his training he is obligated to bring in an appropriate sum, which is rather high. Once the mentioned Oxford test is filled out, the managers of the organization, if they see that certain people are literally "at the end of their rope," and the danger of suicide consequently arises, talk them into signing a statement that frees organization staff from liability for the candidate's life. Then the members sign a contract about working without pay or health insurance for a period of up to five years. At the final stage, to improve their situation members are sent to Los Angeles (USA), where the residence of the World Church of Scientology is located, and there they sign a contract for a period of one billion years." "The basic methods that are applied at the first stages are 'auditing' and the 'purification' procedure. 'Auditing' is a psychotherapeutic technique that uses a procedure of the intellect." The Athens court recognized as impermissible the interference into a person's mind, and the applications of methods of personality testing and "auditing." Recognized as illegal was another method, the "purification" procedure; before starting it the participant signs a contract about freeing the organization from liability and recognizing the danger which exists for him in connection with the application of this method. "Both mentioned methods of the organization are illegal and arbitrary, and the illegality consists of the unpleasant degree of defense and prevention. These methods include elements of danger for the health of the people participating in them. Participation in this organization means, for its members, rejection of one's own personality, of conduct regarding family, which could be broken off completely by reason of their negative attitude to the consequences of Scientology, dropping out of school and complete dedication to the organization."

The decision of the Athens court in the first instance of October 7, 1996 directly indicated that the "discussion is about an organization with a totalitarian structure and tendencies, which in essence hold a person in contempt, operates freely for the sake of appearances, for drawing members in, who then apply to themselves all the mentioned procedures and theories, immersing their minds with the goal of creating administration of methods of thinking and lessening resistance (basic positions of the Scientology founder's theories), so that people become weak-willed creatures who've lost the potential of making a decision, become the products of their own free will that has gone through a propagandistic filter and the corresponding processing." The decision of the court also indicated that the "Scientology organization cannot plead violation of rights or religious freedom," since its activity is associated with lessening the rights of other people, "Moral health and public order are what this organization most of all offends with its activity. The actions it commits in medicine, social and moral relations are harmful and dangerous." Noting that the organization had submitted a petition about the recognition of its name, "Scientology," the court indicated in its decision that this organization implemented economic activity in Greece for the sake of personal interests in the form of a philosophical organization, but in recent times in the religious part. It was not an independent organization, but subject to strict hierarchical structure under the observation and control of foreign centers and organization, which contradicted public order.

In its final account the Athens court, with its first instance decision of October 7, 1996, recognized that the organization called "Center of Applied Philosophy of Greece," in propagating the views of Scientology founder Hubbard, "is a covert financial-wares company, which offers services on the market by spiritual-therapeutic means, by social means, by seminars, by purification procedures and by means of speculative activities." It has a foreign concept and understanding of a person, as it does about a free individuals, morals and customs, and does not respond to the interests of the Greek people (l.d. 266-281, t. 5).

In another case the Athens Appeals court on June 3, 1986 decided to disband (liquidate) an organization under the name of Cultural Organization of Bkhativedant" and transfer the property to the government," because it recognized that the "goal and function of this organization was illegal and countered the public order." The court established that this organization is a branch of Hindu origin of the "Krishna" religious movement. Using this legal agency it lured young people and minors" and promised to solve their problems; they promised travel abroad, gave student cards to members, even if they were not students, in this way luring in these people so that they became members, and also gave them free food and lodging, particularly young provincials. In reality this lodging was the "chancellery" and "prayer house" of the organization. In essence, this was the shrine of Krishna with an altar and its images. When somebody goes into the shrine, they sign their name to and put address and telephone number in a book located there. Members life in the shrine communally, change their names, cut off their hair, shave their heads, leaving a long lock of hair in back, and wear a typically orange garb, carry a rosary with 108 knots, rise daily at 4 in the morning for prayer, which praises Krishna, and after ten o'clock in the morning go out onto the street, where they distribute books and cards and sing the sacred chant to "Hare Krishna" and "Hare Rama." The mentioned chant, which consists of sixteen words, needs to be completed 1,734 times a day. "Members of this organization until their initiation are subjected to constant mind immersion by Krishna members and until initiation are supposed to accept the basic principles of Krishna as described in the book entitled "Bkhagavad-Gita as she is." Under the effect of these principles are those "who perform devotional services, should be considered sacred people, even if they commit the worst acts." Members of this organization "cut off any connection to family, their profession and dedicate themselves to the devotion of Krishna. In this way they reject themselves, their families and become blind instruments of the organization.
A very typical manifestation of this state and the psychology of members was a mother using a stick to beat her daughter, a member of the movement, and two of her friends, in as much as the daughter's love for parents had changed into hating the consequences of the destructive results of the mentioned teachings and hating "her mother's dedication to Krishna principles." The court came to the conclusion that the organization deprived its members of any freedom and initiative, changed them into weak-willed creatures and docile instruments, which led them to full submission to people and goals, to a foreign nature and concept of people as free beings, foreign in relation to charitable tradition, morals and customs of the Greek people.

In Germany the March 22, 1995 decision of the Hamburg Labor Court on the question of Scientology being a religious association, it was established that Scientology was not a religious or a worldview association, and its registration in the capacity of a religious organization, making it exempt from paying taxes, was illegal, and that the extraordinary members of Scientology who worked in the organization, were hired laborers, and that Scientology Church Hamburg itself was in reality a commercial organization.

In its decision this court indicated in particular that the "advertisement of a religious association without indication of engaging in any discussion about religious association, of all things," was dishonest, that new participants in courses and seminars were recruited by unsalaried members of the organization, who gained ten percent of the sum of their sale of goods and services, and that this recruitment in the absence of accurate honest information about the organization violated the individual's freedom. "Scientology turned dishonest methods of advertisement into the principles of its operations. An organization which, like Scientology, pays a commission for luring in new members and enlisting them to participate in definite paid courses, is neither a religious nor a worldview association," and that the commercial character of this company was defined by a letter from Hubbard: "Make money, make more money; make other people make money (l.d. 246-257, t. 5).

An analogous decision that recognized that Scientology was not a religion was made by the Federal Administrative Court of Germany in February 1995 (l.d. 116, t 9).

At a session of the conference of State Representatives on the issues of sectarianism, State Interior Minister for Bavaria (Germany), Doctor Gunter Beckstein on March 12, 1997 cited the verdict of the North Rhein Westphalia state administrative court of May 31, 1996. That verdict established that "under the guise of a religious association, Scientology combines elements of economic crime and psychological terror." "Scientology strives not for religious goals, but for money and power, financial exploitation and subordination of the human psyche, subordination of the business structure to the maximum amount of profit and distribution of its influence in the economy and society" (l.d. 116-135, t. 9).

"Behind this sect is concealed a criminal organization for money laundering; Scientology spreads a blinding ideology; Scientology is a misanthropic cartel of oppression; its creators are criminals and its members are subject to brainwashing." In connection with this a conclusion was made that the priority ideological goal of Scientology was purifying (clearing) people and the planet," wherein Scientology asserts: "We should all be Scientologists." In his presentation the Bavarian State Interior Minister also asserted that "many risks lie in wait for anyone who joins this organization. Scientology's claim to exclusivity enables the formation of black-white (friend-enemy) paradigm of thought. In individual cases joining leads to a complete change of one's former way of life: separation from family and friends, cutting off professional education, and quiting one's profession. In order to keep members in the sect, the Scientology organization does not hesitate to use the most brutal methods." For that penal camps were created, one of which is located not far from Los Angeles (USA) and is called the "Rehabilitation Project Force. According to reports from former members, "brainwashing" is applied there as is punishment (similar to the camps in North Vietnam in the war era). As an example, information was submitted about a former Scientologist who was supposed to have participated in the "Running Program," going around an orange pole for twelve hours a day reflecting on the fact that they were not all right with the Scientology world." Moreover everyone kept in this camp had to wear a black uniform, complete only the crudest assignments, and they were not allowed to have contact with the outside world. Other similar penal camps are located in Clearwater (Florida), Sydney (Australia), Saint Hill, (England) and Copenhagen (Denmark).

In connection with this the Bavarian state Interior Minister came to the conclusion that "Scientology represented a danger to the values of the free world," that Scientology had gained influence in entire branches of the state economy; its sphere of activity included real estate business, consultation in the program products market, organizing seminars for management and personnel training, as well as consultation on issues of selection of personnel and entrepreneurship. The minister recognized Scientology's system of managing businesses as being based on violence and enslavement of hired personnel, in connection with liberal methods of paying for work and punishment, constant compulsion of staff to work that was beyond human power, establishment of totalitarian control in running businesses by means of an internal system of denunciative reporting and gossip.

In his presentation the minister also came to the conclusion that the institution of the German people's economy was at risk from the economic operations of the Scientologists: the psychic deformation (of the personality), exploitation and aggravation of personal debt, economic blackmail and divulgence of commercial secrets, protectionism as a service, unfair competition and infringement of professional secrets.

Considering that the government has the right to this and does not have to leave this activity unheeded, the government of Bavaria in October 1995 formed a special program of action directed against the Scientology organization.

By the decision of the (German) Bavarian Ministers Council of October 29, 1996, a program of action was introduced on November 1, 1996 in which all who desired to appear before the state agency could talk about the obligations of members of Scientology. During this it was learned that "Scientology requires from each member recognition of the organization as supreme authority." Therefore, those who could not distance themselves from that did not have the right to hold a civil service position. It was also established by decision of the Ministers Council that as of November 1996, those accepting a state order had to submit a declaration as to claims of its member companies in the Scientology empire (for example, creation of program products, management training). It was also decided not to render any state aid to event (such as cultural) in which Scientologists participated.

Recognizing the duty of the state to protect the people, the Government of Bavaria, relating in all seriousness to this duty, declared tht it could not allow: "for youth to be indoctrinated into a doctrine which is in absolute subordination to the organization; for drug addicts to come into psychic dependence in the course of therapy in the Scientology 'Narconon' program; or for people coming into psychiatric clinics, who fall into the hands of doctors who are obligated to recruit new members into Scientology. It turned special attention to Scientology being particularly interested in the activities of this sphere, since it controls the Commission for the Violation by Psychiatry of Human Rights, and it is interested in police officers passing internal information to the Scientology organization."

In his presentation the Bavarian Interior Minister also gave an analysis of the Scientology organization in Europe and, in particular, it indicated that in November 1996 in France the former manager of the Scientology branch of Lyon was sentenced to multiple years confinement in prison for inducement to suicide, that accomplices in the crime from a number of Scientologists were sentenced to pay monetary fines for fraud; in January 1997 in Milan, Italy, 29 members of the local Scientology organization were sentenced to deprivation of liberty for formation of an organization of a criminal grouping; in January 1997 in Greece the Scientology organization in Athens was prohibited. In connection with this special emphasis was placed in the minister's presentation on a joint resolution by Bavaria and Baden-Wurtemburg, passed at the Conference of State Interior Ministers November 22, 1996 in Hamburg about the necessity to bring the theme of Scientology at the European international level and in the distribution of state contracts to guarantee that Scientology suppliers were not able to participate in them. During this it was indicated that the most important goal of the Bavarian government was applying procedures for the defense of the Constitution against Scientology. All who consider this excessive or even undemocratic need to clear for themselves the key points of L.R. Hubbard's teachings: "Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist." ... may be "tricked, sued, lied to or destroyed".

His presentation underscored the necessity of rendering aid to the victims of Scientology, who "often are hopelessly in debt (fees for courses, taxes, etc.), continue to be put under pressure from the organization (officers of the Scientology organization), have problems in their families, broken marriages (the spouse remains in Scientology), are in a state of psychic exhaustion (auditing, psychoterror) and have lost social contacts (lost family and circle of friends)." These were the goals with which the Working Committee on Sectarian Issues was formed in Munich. It was also necessary to create a small number of reception points for victims of Scientology and its former members (l.d. 119, t. 9).

Court resolutions have also been made in the case of the "Unification Church" (Moon).

For instance the district court of Fukuoka established on May 27, 1994, that the "Unification Church" was legally accountable for illegal operations in extortion of monetary donations in business with the plaintiffs, and demanded that it pay damages to the individuals. "The court recognizes that the 'Unification Church,' a religious corporation which is a legal person, actually committed illegal actions against the plaintiffs." In connection with this, in addition to corporate responsibility, the court also recognized personal responsibility of the staff of "Unification Church" for actions of the church corporation as legal persons (l.d. 236-240, t. 6).

An assessment of the activity of the "Unification Church" in Japan was given in March 1994 by the National Network of Lawyers. The made a declaration that the spiritual trafficking conducted by the "Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity" (referred herein as "Unification Church") was an unconscientious business, the goal of which was attainment of profits, fraud and intimidation of the public. Most characteristically this was accomplished in the following ways: vendors made their rounds of people's housing or approached them on the street in the city center, during which they concealed their membership in the "Unification Church" and suggested they fill out a survey to study the worldview of young people. At the same time they found out about problems and worries in the families of their subjects and sounded out their financial situation. They compelled people to buy an engraved stamp or rosary, compel them to long hours of involvement in which the vendors state that "Buying is necessary for people so that they can be free of the terrible fate of their ancestors," or compel people to buy a marble vessel or concentrated essence, saying, "If you don't get this right now, your parents will soon die, your children will take ill and your husband will take a lover. You will not be able to maintain a happy marriage. And all this because your ancestor committed murder, engaged in fornication, etc." This intimidation and compulsion would continue many hours. The compelled people to buy statues of Buddha and their genealogical tree using the same technique of intimidation and make them give up all their savings in the form of donations. Sales were accomplished using overblown prices and extremely aggressive methods.

Moreover, as the National Network of Lawyers of Japan indicated, the sum of donations that Moon ordered leading Japanese functionaries to collect from their adherents, in 1986 and 1987, consisted of no less than ten billion yen monthly, and in 1990, several billion yen monthly. In order to have the possibility of filling Moon's order, his followers who had work were forced to take out loans of a million yen from various financial institutions. Besides that, homeowners who possessed real estate and single seniors way made by way of intimidation to make donations of tens and hundreds of millions of yen. They were also compelled to take out loans from financial institutions, secured by their real estate, and transferring the money to the "Unification Church," in connection with which very many individuals were put into extremely difficult situations with growing debt that they were not able to repay. The sum total of financial loss of individuals exceeded sixty billion yen, and for the last five years (from February 1989 to February 1994) the number of cases involving lawyers in connection with the confiscation of money from citizens, has come to sixty thousand. As noted in a statement by the National Network of Lawyers, "in June 1993 two district courts in Tokyo and Yokohama recognized that damages inflicted on victims of the "Unification Church" are a civil-legal offense. A decision was made to seize possessions, land and the headquarters building of the "Unification Church." It was also noted that "in January 1993 the new president of the Japanese "Unification Church" submitted a petition to the lawyers with a request to give him a postponement on payment of compensation because the Japanese "Unification Church" had on its balance a 400 million yen debt." It was typical that a "large part of the astronomical resources gathered in Japan had been transferred by companies associated with Moon and the "Unification Church" to Korea and the USA."

It was specially underscored that "among the Japanese followers of the "Unification Church" (nearly 20,000 people) more than half left their work and deserted their families to live communally with other people. They were compelled to engage in collection of money from morning to night, using devious underhanded means of proselytizing and spiritual trafficking. They learned to believe and die and live for Moon. Attracting people into the "Unification Church" by deceitful means, intimidating people and pressing for payments, by this way they would save themselves in the spiritual world. The problem with missionary operations of the "Unification Church" is that in initially attracting people, they conceal their membership in the "Unification Church" and for that matter their connection to religion, and then resort to controlling the consciousness of their victims, using carefully worked out methods of intimidation. Therefore many followers of the "Unification Church" squander their youth, living over the course of many years on a minimal monthly subsistence, feeling constantly under threat, based on Moon's doctrine, and feeling the effects of exhaustive work. Although they were perpetrators of criminal 'spiritual trafficking,' they themselves were the victims of this belief."

With the goal of protecting its fellow citizens, the National Network of Lawyers recommended that, for Moon and the management personnel of the "Unification Church" in Korea, a mandatory sale be held, in the interests of victims who reside in Japan, of private property that was attained by the "Unification Church" due to fleecing Japanese; return of their money to them; stopping the collection of money and stopping Moon's Japanese adherents to engage in deceitful missionary work, stop their adherents from proselytizing and attracting people for missionary activity into places like video centers while concealing their own membership in the "Unification Church" (l.d. 236 reverse side, t. 6).

The authenticity of the Fukuoka district court's decision and statement of the National Network of Lawyers (Japan), which, according to a statement by the respondent, was officially transmitted to the Department of External Church Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church by a delegation of the National Council of Christian Churches of Korea, was corroborated by a witness on the respondent's side, Professor Claire Champlain (France).

A negative assessment of the Church of Scientology was also issued October 16, 1984 on case No. C-420153, which established: " The picture painted by these former dedicated
Scientologists, all of whom were intimately involved with LRH, or Mary Jane Hubbard, or of the Scientology Organization, is on one hand pathetic, and on the other hand, outrageous. Each of these persons literally gave years of his or her respective life in support of a man, LRH, and his ideas. Each has manifested a waste and loss or frustration which is incapable of description. Each has broken with the movement for a variety of reasons, but at the same time, each is, still bound by the knowledge that the Church has in its possession his or her most inner thoughts and confessions, all recorded in "Pre-clear (P.C.) folders" or other security files of the organization, and that the Church or its minions is fully capable of intimidation or other physical or psychological abuse if it suits their ends. The record is replete with evidence of such abuse." Testimony about similar abuse is innumerable. In 1970 the French state police agency conducted an investigation of Scientology and came to the conclusion: "This is a sect under the pretext 'of freeing humanity' while it is nothing more than an enormous enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts for them to use its pseudoscientific theory of 'auditing' and 'drama productions' taken to extreme form (lie detectors, coined terminology), disrupting connections of adepts from their families and use of blackmail against people who do not want to remain longer with this sect." A similar conclusion can be cited from testimony submitted to this court in 1984. Apart from violating the civil rights of its members and outrages upon them by the (Scientology) organization, for many years the organization has used the "fair game" doctrine to cow and persecute those people -- not members of the sect -- who it considers to be its enemies."

Therefore the California Supreme Court deemed to indicate in its determination, " The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and the bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements. The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egoism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile. " (l.d. 111-113, t. 5).

The United States Supreme Court refused further appeal by the Church of Scientology on the decision of the California Supreme Court and obliged the sect to pay the plaintiff two and a half million dollars plus dividends (coming to six million dollars).

In the "Casey Hill vs. the Church of Scientology" proceedings in 1995, the Supreme Court of Canada made a decision to affirm the original sentence about the largest punishment ever made for libel in Canada (1.6 million Canadian dollars), which the sect was obliged to pay: "Every aspect of this case demonstrates the very real and persistent malice of Scientology." (l.d. 110, t. 9).

According to a report (presenting a summary report of world information agencies) distributed in January 1997 through the International Computer Network, the "Internet,"

On January 18, 1997 the Milan Appeals Court sentenced 29 members of the "Church of Scientology" to terms of prison confinement from 9 to 20 months for criminal association. Another seven Scientologists were sentenced more leniently for exploiting mentally impaired people.

In October 1996 in France three Scientologists were sentenced to prison confinement for terms of 6 to 18 months for exerting pressure on Doctor Abgrall, an expert witness in the Lyon proceedings. Also indicated was an accusation of theft; Scientology stole Abgrall's address book and read his mail.

On November 22, 1996 the Lyon court (France) recognized as guilty 14 Scientologists of fraud. The former head of the Lyon Scientology organization, Jean-Jacques Mazier was sentenced to eighteen months in prison, eighteen months confinement conditional and fined 500,000 franks. The court recognized him as guilty of manslaughter in a case concerning the suicide of Patric Vic.

In July 1996, after receiving 4,200 complaints, the Greek court prohibited the Scientology organization in Athens. The object of the court's inquiry was documents seized during a search of the Athens branch of Scientology, according to which Scientology had managed to infiltrate into the Greek intelligence service in 1993 (l.d. 108, t. 6).

On January 17, 1997 the Greek court banned all of Hubbard's Scientology organization from the Greek Republic's territory (l.d. 119, t. 9).

The religious status of Scientology and its tax exemption was abolished in 1996 in France, Germany and Denmark (l.d. 108-113, t. 9).

In Great Britain the religious status of Scientology has never been recognized. Scientology was also refused the attainment of status of charitable organization. The position of the government of Great Britain has not changed since the time that Health Minister Kenneth Robinson called the "Church of Scientology" a pseudopsychological sect, and the first deputy minister of internal affairs and deputy of the Parliament of Great Britain Thomas Sackville recognized on October 19, 1996: "In the past the Home Office [UK State Department] has seemed to give the impression it is neutral and I very much regret this. Were anti-cult ... These people are insidious and they recruit in order to exploit and abuse. He also said that the term new religious movement would no longer be condoned in the Home Office." (l.d. 108, t.9).

The "Internet" international network had another report about initiating civil and criminal cases and about carrying out sentences in relation to members (including those engaged in management positions) of organizations like Scientology, "Unification Church," "Family," "Society for Krishna Consciousness" and others.

The "Internet" international network contains, among other things, information about nontraditional religious organizations; it is an information channel, according to an evaluation from the "Nedelya" newspaper, on a level with the mass media (l.d. 31, t. 7).

According to information from "Internet" service providers in Russia, it follows that the documents cited above are actually found in the "Internet" network for public consumption (l.d. 934, t.5).

Therefore the documents photocopied by the respondents of the above court sentences from various countries regarding management or members, or the nontraditional religious organizations themselves, obtained from the "Internet" information channels and translated into Russian for the established legal system -- the court considers valid to use in the capacity of evidence in the case.

Examination in the capacity of testimony of lawyers and religious specialists -- Prof. Claire Champollion, (France), Prof. Johannes Aargord (Denmark), Prof. Georgas Krippas (Greece), Pastor Thomas Gandow (Germany) -- on the side of the respondent, and Prof. Eileen Barker (Great Britain), Prof. James Richardson (USA) - from the side of the plaintiff, verifies that the above mentioned verdicts and court decisions of Japan, USA, Italy, France, German and Greece really were carried out, and for all persons studying the activities of nontraditional religious organizations, the information about these verdicts are public facts.

In correspondence with article 49 RF GPK testimony on civil cases is any factual information on the basis of which in the legal system the court establishes the presence or absence of conditions, substantiating requirements and objections, and other conditions having significance for legal resolution of the case.

This information is established, in particular, by the discussion of sides and third parties, designated witnesses and written evidence Testimony attained in violation of the law does not have legal force and can not be considered in the basis of the court's decision.

The court does not have a basis for recognizing a copy of the court verdicts from various states attained in violation of the law. The court proceeds from the fact that the copy of the verdicts have been properly certified, and in the letter of September 20, 1996 from the RF embassy in Germany under the name of RF Health Minister A.D. Tsaregorodtsev it is indicated that the verdicts were carried out and the court made a decision in the case that was initiated in connection with counter-legal activity of nontraditional religious organizations (l.d. 1-3, t. 5).

A copy of the properly certified verdicts of Athens court from October 7, 1996 and from June 3, 1996 was presented to the court from Professor Georgas Krippas.

Attention is merited to the fact that the plaintiffs themselves have asked about familiarization with the materials of the case in the capacity of evidence of a number of documents that they also obtained from the "Internet" informational network, as have the respondents.

Certification of information located on "Internet" channels which the plaintiffs used in the capacity of evidence have not been subjected to doubt by them. Under such circumstances there is a basis for recognizing the copies of the verdicts presented by the respondent, which were published in the same "Internet" channel, as evidence in the case, in so far as they are not the opinions of tangible people or their interpretation of legal proceedings.

Information about the activity of international nontraditional religious organizations (from among which respondent A.L. Dvorkin has selected "totalitarian sects" and wrote in his brochure about them exactly, and about the activities of these sects being connected with violations of human rights) were also published in various years in literature, which respondent A.L. Dvorkin has used in work on the brochure.

For instance, the book by John Haber and L. Gruson "Monkey on a Stick", published in 1988, takes authentic facts, collected by the journalists, of criminal activity by the management of the "Society for Krishna Consciousness": trafficking in drugs and weapons, robbery and sale of stolen goods, extortion, violation of laws on trade, beating, rape (including a number of minors), murder, etc.

A.L. Dvorkin refers to this book in his brochure as a source of his information about the activities of nontraditional religious organizations (p. 9 brochure).

Examined in the case in the capacity of witnesses and religious specialists on the side of the respondent (Prof. Johannes Aargord (Denmark)), Pastor Thomas Gandow (FRG), Prof. Claire Champollion (France), as well as on the side of the plaintiffs (Prof. Eileen Barker (Great Britain)), and Prof. James Richardson (USA) have corroborated that although the book "Monkey on a Stick" was written by journalists using trick methods, nonetheless all the facts they described as multiple criminal deeds in the "Society of Krishna Consciousness" did take place in reality.

The "Times" magazine of May 6, 1991 published an article by Richard Behar, "Scientology -- thriving cult of greed and power" about the operations of Scientology in the USA and throughout the world and it directly indicated the mafia-like character of the activity of this new religious organization: The Church of Scientology, started by science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard to "clear" people of unhappiness, portrays itself as a religion. In reality the church is a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner... Eleven top Scientologists, including Hubbard's wife, were sent to prison in the early 1980s for infiltrating, burglarizing and wiretapping more than 100 private and government agencies in attempts to block their investigations. ... Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members... This is a criminal organization, day in and day out."

This and other negative information about Scientology and Scientologists, published in the article, was recognized as corresponding to reality. According to an article in "Time" magazine of January 27, 1997, a district court of New York rejected a suit by the "Church of Scientology International" against "Time" magazine about refuting discrediting information for this nontraditional religious organization.

Plaintiffs and witnesses on their behalf do not contest these facts in the case.

Zh.F. Buaya's book "Empire of Moon", (Moscow, published by "Politicheskaya Literatura", 1990) gives an expanded analysis of the operations of Moon's "Unification Church," in particular, one of its chapters is named "Munistskaya Mafiya" (chapter 11, section 3).

This publication, as this was directly seen from the reference to this book given by respondent A.L. Dvorkin, was used in the capacity of a source of information about the operations of totalitarian sects (l.d. 168, t. 1; l.d. 204-205, t. 5).

During his work on the brochure, A.L. Dvorkin also used material from the book "Combating Cult Mind Control" by Steven Hassan (published by Park Street Press, Rochester, Vermont, 1990).

Judging from extracts from this book (a translation of which has been put into the established legal system), violations of human rights, inherent in new religious movements, include violence upon individuals, fraud, striving for power, controlling consciousness, etc.

As A.L. Dvorkin explained, during the work on the brochure he also used a publication, published 1995 by "Peter Ford" by Jon Atack "Total Freedom Trap (Scientology, Dianetics and L. Ron Hubbard)", the official translation of which A.L. Dvorkin had copyrighted in 1992 (misprint, should be 1995).

According to the explanation by respondent A.L. Dvorkin, during the preparation of his brochure he also used the book "Varnashram -- Manifest of social discretion" by the "Society of Krishna Consciousness" (author Kharikesha Svami, one of the Moscow branch managers), published by "Partiya Sabnkirtana" in 1992 (copyright belongs to the official publishing house of the "International Society of Krishna Consciousness" "Bkhaktivedanta Booktrust") in which it was directly stated that the passage to power (preparations to seize power) was one of the goals of the operations of this nontraditional religious organization.

The plaintiffs and the functionary, questioned at their request, of the "Society for Krishna Consciousness in Russia," V.M. Tuneev admitted that "Manifest" by Kharikesha Svami had this information. However, he asserted that the "Manifest," was revised in this part and that other interpretations than his were allowed. Meanwhile they recognized that the officially published statement about the rejection of separate precepts of "Manifest" had not been made with the author up as of this time.

Nor did the plaintiffs dispute the circumstance that the nontraditional religion "Aum Shinrikyo" actually participated in a terrorist attack on the Tokyo subway and that regarding a division of this organization in Russia ("Doctrine of AUM Truth"), the Ostankinsky Intermunicipal Court of Moscow issued a decision April 18, 1995. Recognition of invalid registration with the judicial organs, the Russian branch of the Japanese religious organization "Aum Shinrikyo" and the Moscow religious association "Doctrine of AUM Truth" were associated with causing harm to the public health, taking away people's possessions, and involving minors in sect operations (l.d. 30-47, t.4).

In particular, the decision of the Ostankinsky intermunicipal court of Moscow established the following facts on April 18, 1995:

"... Citizens included on the lists of the (two Aum Shinrikyo) religious organizations, (lists) composed in strict and defined form, having complete information as to bibliographic particulars and other information, registration number and credentials -- are members of the religious organizations.

Also entered is the confirmation of the fact of luring into membership of religious organizations minors and children, which is a gross violation of the Charter of religious organizations and art. 18 of the Law "On freedom of practice of faith."

It was established by the court that the activity of the religious organizations violates the position of the Charter on voluntary enrolment, in using the publication of members of the organization from their lists.

The religious organizations developed the so-called "Regulations of drawing people into the religious organization," which clearly indicated ways and methods of influencing people to draw them into becoming members of the organization (t. 4 l.d. 17-19).

In the religious organizations enticement of new members was entrusted to "bodhisattva" -- distributors and agitators of the teachings, whose goal was to include any methods to "haul" people into the organization.

In places where the most people accumulated: subway stations, underground passages, streets, people were given literature of an advertising nature with the goal of interesting them in the activity of the organization, and in the absence of interest they were forcefully given literature, pushed into their hands, they were forcefully pushed to vendor stands with books and brochures, application forms and credentials needed to pay their prices; if a person refused and left, he was overtaken, detained, threatened with various unpleasantries as were his parents.

... Membership in religious organizations depended on timely collection of a definite sum of donations monthly; in case the level was insufficient, the person was excluded from membership in the organization and deprived of the right of membership in the organization.

The given circumstances were confirmed in the Regulations of Collecting Monthly Donations, which indicated the size of monthly donations -- 300 rubles, the time for collecting donations, calculating amounts and provisions for the exclusion of members from the organization in case of nonpayment of membership payments (t. 3 l.d. 56).

... in the time that work and (initiation) seminars were being carried out it was impossible to leave the building, it was mandatory to take unknown pills, give blood for analysis; the result of involvement in the organization was full dependency on the teachings, "like on drugs," developing a feeling of physical illness toward nonbelievers, so that it became impossible to use public transport; going to see parents was not recommended, neither was leaving the organization's walls, otherwise one would become "dirty" upon being associated with nonbelievers, i.e. they contradicted the teachings and full material dependency -- monks ("samana") and bodhisattva have all their material needs assured by the organization -- food, clothing, they received from five to fifteen thousand rubles monthly, dependent on organization needs, additional pay for needed expenses, no limit on the sums in case of necessity (payment of expenses associated with registration of overseas passports), necessity of collecting "maximum" donations, including lodging, gold ornaments, video and radio equipment and financial sums; besides that, the necessity of maintaining certain poses (lotus) for which a person may be bound so that he goes through pain, i.e. in Japan people suffer even more -- they are beaten; they take food once a day, and every week from 10 p.m. Sunday to 5 a.m. Tuesday taking food is forbidden; after such a duration of fasting they are forced to gorge from several dishes, followed by several calls for vomiting, which they are forced to eat.

... Moreover, one of the verified forcible influences on people the court found in the religious organizations was handcuffs (t.2 l.d. 26) which counteract the argument by representatives of religious organizations about the absence of violence.

... Witness O.V. Stenyaev indicated to the court that on former members of the organization he observed signs of "fragility" after they stopped taking vitamins, powder and listening to the "mantra"; they used pressure on the head, exhaustion, feelings of fear, sleeplessness and were afraid of physical reprisal.

... Monks ("samana") were obligated to constantly live in the center or its branches, worked nowhere, didn't study, were completely in the organization's hands, were totally cut off from family, children and parents, observed the essential principle of "maximum donations" to the good of the religious organizations; regardless of whether they had the agreement of the parents and relatives or not the "samana" had room for minors.

... The court considers that the realization of monastic activity by the religious organization was not provided for by the charter of these organizations, and that they were in gross violations of the law.

... It is established by the court that the methods used by the religious organizations of learning the mantra (prayer), its thousands of repetitions, accompanied by a special musical setting, evokes with definite continuity that their adaptation of conditions that correspond to the concept of "self-hypnosis," also using the practice of "deep breathing," during the application of which loss of consciousness is possible, as well as changes in the human brain, which corresponding medical devices have established as "brain death" (flat line, straight line), a manifestation of having or incipient psychic ailments.

... The court considers that the religious organizations, during the implementation of their operations, used methods of their trade, methods of deep breathing and holding the breath, during which a doctor's oversight was needed, but in definite testimony the condition of human health was counterindicated to application of the indicated practice, and therefore the court considers that the religious organizations implemented activities associated with exerting influence on the health of the person without license and that their implementation is a gross violation of the RF Law "On licensing individual forms of activity."

... In the activities of the religious organizations a technical means of influence was used on the brains of the people -- the "Perfect Salvation" Initiation ("Helmet of Salvation"), which was a construction of more than twenty electrical leads, one end of each attached to a metal clamp located on strips of material and worn on the head, with the other end of the electrical lead fastened by connectors to an electrooscillograph.

Wearing this helmet and connecting it to an electrical device, the person remained in it for several days.

... The respondent has not presented a license to use such a device.

Before the presentation by the plaintiff of the "helmet" in the capacity of material proof, the religious organization absolutely did not recognize the fact of the existence or the use of the "helmet," which is evaluated by the court as an attempt by the respondent to conceal the application of technical means to influence the health of a person without license, and its use is also a gross violation of the named RF Law and is not provided for in the current charter of the given religious organizations.

...Members of the given religious organizations were deprived of rights and the possibility of appeal, in case of necessity, for medical assistance, in so far as illness and worsening conditions of health were explained by organization members as "purification" of the organism, and it was necessary to go through this condition, the person had to be more involved with the lessons so the illness would pass.

... It was established by the court and these circumstances were not contested by the religious organizations, that various printed publications of the given organizations, and video and audio programs had information about the disappearance of various illnesses, including AIDS and others, despite the fact that the organizations do not have a license to practice medical activity (t. 4 l.d. 53), and therefore the court believes that the testimony from the witnesses about being forbidden to get medical help from a doctor is founded, in as much as cure from disease was guaranteed by the respondents, provided one attended the lessons and appeared as a member of the organization.

The given regulations and conditions the members of the religious organizations were in led to the causes of harm to their health, with potential irreversible consequences in the future and are inhumane.

... The activity of the religious organizations was connected with the implementation of scientific and commercial activity in the spheres of physics, electronics ... in the structure of religious organizations existed groups of science and business groups, which organized their firms, the activity of which was not connected with the realization of religious activities, but the profits went to the religious organizations, but this was kept secret from the rest of the members of the organization.

... The court considers that the activities of the religious organizations, the Russian branch of the Japanese religious corporation "Aum Shinrikyo" and the Moscow religious association "Doctrine of AUM Truth", were connected with causing harm to the public health, using the application of technical means on people without license and that such applications were in gross violation of the stated charter and the Law "On freedom of practice of religion," manifested in attracting as members of the religious organizations minors and children, nonobservance of the principle of voluntary enrolment, location and exit as members of the organization, by forcing collection from members of the organization monetary and material goods in the form of donations, as well as goods not connected with the religious activities of these organizations, realization of activity by means of introducing and drawing into monkhood minors and children without the consent of their parents, application and practice of methods of "self-hypnosis," "deep breathing," static poses, electronic devices such as the "helmet of salvation," "vitamins," "powder" without an individual approach or control of a doctor, not having a license to use these methods of influence or medical preparations on human organisms -- this is a gross violation of the Law, does not conform to the activity of religious organizations, is illegal and is subject to liquidation as a legal person.

The activity of the religious organizations was connected with influence on personality, the organism and health of the people, and representatives of the religious organizations do not dispute the fact of drawing into the organization people, the health of which these methods constantly counterindicated, taking into account the age of the members of the organizations (from 2 to 70), the number of members, several tens of thousands of people, the specific features of influence of the doctrine used by the religious organizations on the psyche and life of vital organs, the human brain and their consequences."

In accordance with art. 208 of the RF GPK, decisions made in courts of law have a general obligation (prejudicial) significance, and according to art. 55 RF GPK, facts established by appearance in a court of law by decision of the court by one civil case, are not demonstrated again during investigation of other civil cases.

The Public Committee for the protection of freedom of conscience claims to defend all new religious organizations, making no exclusion for "Aum Shinrikyo" or "Beloe Bratstvo." At the same time the other plaintiffs, L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev, place special emphasis on their intent to defend the business reputation of "Aum Shinrikyo" and "Beloe Bratstvo." L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev themselves recognize the legitimacy of the negative assessment of the activity of the Russian branch of "Aum Shinrikyo" and the Moscow religious association in Russia ""Doctrine of AUM Truth" and "Beloe Bratstvo" in connection with the facts of human rights violations in these nontraditional religious organizations.

This substantial contradiction in the positions of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and its management staff in the persons of L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev by itself testifies to the activity of separate nontraditional religious organizations in Russia bearing a danger to the civil disposition associated with human rights violations, and therefore the reputation of these sects are not subject to court protection.

In correlating the information given above about the activity of international nontraditional religious organizations, available in verdicts and court decisions of various nations and published in the literature of various countries, with the information about "totalitarian sects" put forth by A.L. Dvorkin and contested by the plaintiffs, the court comes to the conclusion that the information given in Dvorkin's brochure corresponds to reality. It expresses the opinion of A.L. Dvorkin about new nontraditional religious organizations. Even before the brochure's publication, A.L. Dvorkin had a multitude of supporters.

The plaintiffs contest the correspondence to reality (and ask refutation) of A.L. Dvorkin's assertion that new nontraditional religious movements take away from people material valuables "(which, incidentally, sects never do without)"

On page 2 of his brochure A.L. Dvorkin actually explained: "Why do these same groups remain immune, which remove from people not only material valuables (which, incidentally, sects never do without), but their individual personality?"

From the context this phrase was taken as disparaging by the plaintiffs only the part that addresses the removal of material valuables. Dvorkin's assertion that these groups remove from people not only material valuables, but also their individual personality is not at all disparaging to the plaintiffs, although it's obvious that an individual's personality is much more valuable than his possessions.

In asserting that the information about the removal from people in nontraditional religious organizations of material valuables does not correspond to reality, the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience pleads that it "is not aware of a case in which those religious organizations, as indicated by A.L. Dvorkin, or their leaders, have been taken to criminal court to account for crimes against property, and the criminal investigation initiated more than six years ago against Aum Shinrikyo is not complete at this time and does not have official information about this organization confiscating its members valuables."

Plaintiffs L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev and N.A. Balukova, of A.L. Dvorkin's sentence given above, find only one part of it disparaging. They also plead that they are "not aware of information about verdicts that have gone into effect about a criminal case for crimes against property on the side of the leaders, management, official representatives or groups of faithful religious associations."

In the opinion of the plaintiffs, only verdicts of the court, which have gone into legal effect, can establish the fact of illegal activity by new religious movements or their leaders in relation to members of these organizations (when this activity is connection with removal from people of material valuables, beatings and rape, preparations to seize power and when the organization does not stop at physically removing people or groups that they find unpleasant).

Meanwhile the plaintiffs plead that in accordance with art. 49 of the RF Constitution the guilt of a person in committing a crime is shown in the available Federal legal system and becomes established by a court verdict that goes into effect. In the plaintiffs' opinion, in correspondence with the principle of admissibility of evidence (art. 54 RF GPK) the commission of crimes by religious organizations and their members, also like the "information that the given associations are criminal associations," can be submitted only as admissible means of proof if it is a court verdict that has gone into legal effect.

The court cannot agree with these arguments. Russian criminal law recognizes the victim of a crime only as a physical, and not a legal, person. The plaintiffs themselves in the course of the court proceedings have repeatedly asserted that even in case of conviction of managers or individual sect members, it's impossible to talk about criminal activity on the part of the religious organization, in so far as the verdict of the court convicted the actual person, and not the religious organizations as a whole. In this the plaintiffs themselves, in essence, bring up the question of even in case of commission of a crime by members or leaders of international nontraditional religious organizations or human rights violations in them, whether this could influence the reputation of those same religious organizations, which according to RF legislation are not able to be held to criminal accountability.

This approach of the plaintiffs to the protection in the legal system of the reputation of new (nontraditional) religious organizations cannot be recognized as well founded.

The fact of human rights violation in new nontraditional religious organizations, if they are connected with the application of violence, with the removal of material valuables from their members is in and of itself independent of whether court verdicts in legal force have been established, or have been established in other systems incumbent upon any civilized government to react to them with the goal of their suppression. These facts can be established, after all, by any means of proof (art. 49 RF GPK). Meanwhile the court proceeds on the assumption that A.L. Dvorkin's brochure is directed against violations of "civil and human" rights of members of nontraditional religious organizations. For this precise reason in light of this problem the court sees it necessary to affirm the correspondence to reality of A.L. Dvorkin's assertions about the forms of violations of rights and freedoms of the citizen in "totalitarian" sects.

In the current case, the respondents, third person and Public Committee for the Protection of Youth have submitted ample information testifying about the violation of human rights by new religious movements. For instance, the decision of the Ostankinsky Intermunicipal Court of the city of Moscow on April 18, 1994, established the fact of removal from sect members of property (material valuables) in the Russian branch of the sect "Aum Shinrikyo" and in Moscow's "Doctrine of AUM Truth.

The fact of removal of property from members of new religious movements was corroborated by all witnesses testifying for the respondent and by a number of witnesses testifying for the plaintiff. For instance, A.Yu. Prozherina, staff worker for the "Church of Scientology", admitted that the operations of her "church" was implemented only with mandatory "donations," fixed sums which were obtained in a very large amount.

Meriting special attention is the fact that the plaintiff's witness, D.E. Furman, in giving testimony about how A.L. Dvorkin's brochure had a disparaging character and about the information in it about totalitarian sects not corresponding to reality, himself in his article in the magazine "USA: Economics, Politics, Ideology" No. 6 o 1979 said that the confiscation of material valuables was characteristic for any sect: "In a person's joining, not only does the sect require all property be transferred (which is characteristic for all sects living communally), but its members have to sign a letter confessing to a crime that they have never committed, signed on a blank sheet of paper, where afterwards anything at all can be reproduced" (l.d. 35, t. 7).

In the case A.L. Dvorkin's argument is not repudiated and the other people testifying for him, which in the introduction to the brochure (which contains A.L. Dvorkin's four assertions that were contested by the plaintiffs) he analyzes the activities of international new religious organizations which originate and work abroad. The fact of their removal from people of material valuables was established by the above listed documents of the European Parliament and the Assembly of France, and the following documents:

-- Affidavit of Claire Champollion (l.d. 228-235, t.5).
-- Operations of the "Unification Church" in Japan. March 1994 National Network of Lawyers. Against "Spiritual Trafficking."
-- Decision in the "Unification Church" case by the Fukuoka district court (l.d. 236, t.6).
-- Decision of the civil tribunal of the Fifteenth district of Paris of February 15, 1980 (l.d. 103-112, t.7)
-- Verdict of the Milan Appeals Court of November 5, 1993 (l.d. 55, t. 6).
-- Thesis presented by the Bavarian state Interior Minister, Dr. Gunther Beckstein (March 12, 1997, Rotenburg, session of the conference of state representatives on issues of sectarianism) (l.d. 116-135, t. 9).
-- Federal Labor Court, decision of March 22, 1995. Labor Court Hamburg: decision of August 12, 1993. State Labor Court. decision of May 31, 1994. Re: Membership of Scientology in religious associations (l.d. 185-223, t. 6)
-- "Time" magazine, 1991 of May 6. Richard Behar. Thriving Cult of Greed and Power (l.d. 127-141, t.5).
-- Violation of human rights in Scientology. Inside Scientology. Critics of Scientology. Scientology in difficult conditions. System of belief. Mass media archive of United Kingdom. Focus UK.
-- Federal Chancellery (city of Cologne). To: Working group on issues of Scientology for the Internal Affairs Office of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Mrs. Caberta about the activities and legal status of the Scientology organization abroad (l.d. 78-92, t.4).
-- John Haber and L. Gruson "Monkey on a Stick." Murder, insanity and the Krishnas (chapter from the book)(l.d. 243,t.6).
-- Letter from the chairperson of the "Parents Initiative in Defense of Spiritual Freedom" by Ursula Tsyopel (l.d. 87, t. 9).
-- European Association. European Parliament. Documents of the 1984-1985 session (l.d. 224-225, t.6).
-- European Parliament: Freedom of religion does not justify violation of human rights. Document containing decision of the Euro parliament of February 29, 1996. Bundestag document 196/96 of March 14, 1996. Received from European Parliament. Situation on sects in Europe. Attached letter of the General Secretary of the European Parliament -- 008129 -- of March 12, 1996 (l.d. 41-45, t.6).

-- Citations from the books mentioned in the "Ten Questions..." brochure (l.d. 142-150, t. 5).
-- Sects in France." National Assembly. Informational document. Committee of inquiry (l.d. 136-145, t.9).
-- Charitable social-educational foundation Committee for the Salvation of Youth. June 1, 1996. Analytical note.
-- Decision of the Ostankinsky Intermunicipal (district) peoples court of the city of Moscow of April 18, 1995.

In settling the case the court proceeded from the fact that the Russian names of the new religious movements, the international headquarters of which are located abroad, are not even used in A.L. Dvorkin's brochure. It does have a comparative analysis between international new religious organizations and organizations that originated in Russia.

For instance, page 10 of the brochure (in the introduction) indicates: "Judging from everything, the consequences of the devastation to individuals and society from our domestic 'homegrowns,' like the "Bogorodichny Center" and "Beloe Bratstvo" is fully comparable with Scientology."

The plaintiffs are not disputing this assertion of A.L. Dvorkin's. They themselves recognize its correspondence to reality.

Of the information given on sects in the brochure's introduction (of which only four points are contested by the plaintiffs) A.L. Dvorkin mentioned only the "Bogorodichny Center" and "Beloe Bratstvo" as Russian religious organizations. Meanwhile the plaintiffs, L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev, state that the information regarding "Beloe Bratstvo" is not even contested by them, and therefore they do not intend to defend the business reputation of these religious organizations. On the same lines these religious organizations have made no court demands about protection of their reputation. The fact of removal of property from members of the "Bogorodichny Center" was corroborated by witnesses in court hearings: Ya.I. Lutsenko (Gromov), T.V. Kharlamova, scholar V.P. Maslennikov, M.V. Karanova and V.V. Sventilova.

Neither does the court have a basis to recognize as not corresponding to reality A.L. Dvorkin's information on page five of the brochure that a "person who comes into a totalitarian sect is constantly subject to violence: from beating and rape to exhausting, debilitative work from 15 to 18 hours daily without needed nourishment or a sufficient amount of sleep."

On this point the plaintiffs dispute only that a "person who comes into a totalitarian sect is constantly subject to violence." This means that the plaintiff recognizes the correspondence to reality of the other information contained in the sentence about "exhausting, debilitative work from 15 to 18 hours daily without needed nourishment or a sufficient amount of sleep." Meanwhile this is not contested by the plaintiffs and is contained in one sentence with disputed information directly connected with human rights violations about which A.L. Dvorkin writes in his brochure.

However the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and its management staff L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev, as stated in an independent court demand, did not consider the possibility of standing up to defend the rights of an individual whose rights and freedoms were violated in "totalitarian" sects in connection with "exhausting, debilitative work from 15 to 18 hours daily without needed nourishment or a sufficient amount of sleep." Considering that A.L. Dvorkin's assertion that a "person who comes into a totalitarian sect is constantly subject to violence" is disparaging to nontraditional religious organizations which operate in Russia, the plaintiffs plead that only available verdicts that have gone into legal effect and have established the guilt of totalitarian sects or their managers of beating and rape could be proof that A.L. Dvorkin's assertions correspond to reality.

Evaluating the information on the whole, which is contained on page 5 and from the context of which the plaintiffs cite only a sentence fragment, the court comes to the conclusion that when A.L. Dvorkin says that a person who goes into a totalitarian sect is subject to violence, by this violence he means all forms of physical and psychological influences on a person, including beating and rape and exhausting debilitating work without needed nourishment or a sufficient amount of sleep.

The fact of human rights violations and application of violence to individuals in "totalitarian" sects is corroborated in the following case materials:
-- Affidavit of Claire Champollion.
-- Affidavit of David Mayo (l.d. 123-126,t.5).
-- Affidavit Monica Pignotti (l.d. 118122, t.5)
-- excerpts from the affidavit of Andre Taboyon (l.d. 94-110, t. 5).
-- Determine of Judge Breckenridge (California State Supreme Court, County of Los Angeles). California Church of Scientology, plaintiff, versus Gerald Armstrong, respondent. Memorandum in final determination (l.d. 111, t. 5).
-- Proceedings of Steven Fishman and Uwe Gertz versus the "Church of Scientology" (misprint: should be "Church of Scientology versus Fishman and Gertz).(l.d. 32-46, t. 9; l.d. 75, t. 9).
-- Television broadcast of Sally Jessie Rafael (l.d. 114-117, t. 5).

-- Verdict of the Milan Appeals Court of November 5, 1993.
-- Presentation of the Bavarian State Interior Minister Dr. Gunther Beckstein (March 12, 199y7, Rotenburg, session of the conference of state representatives on issues of sectarianism).
-- "Time" magazine, May 6, 1991 by Richard Behar. Thriving cult of Greed and Power.
-- International Dialogue Center. Memorandum about Scientology (l.d. 114, t.9).
-- Human rights violations in Scientology. Inside Scientology. Critics of Scientology. Scientology in difficult conditions. System of belief. Mass media archive of United Kingdom. Focus UK.
-- Federal Chancellery (city of Cologne). To: Working group on issues of Scientology for the Internal Affairs Office of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Mrs. Caberta about the activities and legal status of the Scientology organization abroad (l.d. 78-92, t.4).
-- "Voice o the Second Generation. How it is." April-June 1993, number 002 (l.d. 241, t.6).
-- Letter of the Center for State Sanitary-epidemiology Inspection in the Northern administrative district signed by the chairman to the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy, Father Superior Johannes (l.d. 1, t. 7).
-- John Haber and L. Gruson "Monkey on a Stick." Murder, insanity and the Krishnas (chapter from the book)(l.d. 243,t.6).
-- Bkhakti Yoga. Introductory Course. Prepared by Adishez Das.
-- "Parents Initiative in Defense of Spiritual Freedom" (Ursula Tsyopel).
-- Enclosures about the changes in psychic conditions of people who have joined the "Bogorodichny Center," gives a basic detailed description by their parents, and also diary entries of sect members. February 17, 1994 (compiled by Yu.I. Polischuk).
-- European Association. European Parliament. Documents of the 1984-1985.
-- European Parliament: Freedom of religion does not justify violation of human rights. Document containing decision of the Euro parliament of February 29, 1996. Bundestag document 196/96 of March 14, 1996. Received from European
-- Citations from the books mentioned in the "Ten Questions..." brochure (l.d. 142-150, t. 5).
-- Sects in France." National Assembly. Informational document. Committee of inquiry (l.d. 136-145, t.9).
-- Charitable social-educational foundation Committee for the Salvation of Youth. June 1, 1996. Analytical note.
-- Decision of the Ostankinsky Intermunicipal (district) peoples court of the city of Moscow of April 18, 1995.

All the facts taken from these documents were published in many sources, are public knowledge known not only to specialists but also to people who are interested in new religious movements. They were corroborated by witnesses testifying for the respondent, Georgas Krippas (Greece), Prof. Claire Champollion (France), Prof. Johannes Aargord (Denmark), Pastor Thomas Gandow (FRG), Ph.Candidate E.N. Volkov (Russia) and others, and also by witnesses testifying for the plaintiffs, Eileen Barker (Great Britain), Prof. James Richardson (USA), M.S. Shterin (Russia), Prof. D.E. Furman (Russia) and others.

Witnesses testifying for the plaintiffs did not deny the facts cited from the above sources, but only pled that they were "nonrepresentative." Standing alone was the testimony of V.I. Ivanov, president of the "NARCONON" organization of the international Scientology organization, who extremely aggressively, showing disrespect to the court, denied the publicly known facts. His conduct was such that plaintiff L.S. Levinson on the following day was forced to make an apology to the court.

The statement by witnesses testifying for the plaintiffs, S.A. Bogdanov and S.I. Ivanenko, about not being aware of the facts cited by the respondent, the court cannot take into consideration, because both of them admitted that they had not mastered foreign languages and, consequently, were not able to adequately determine the situation abroad. Moreover, witness S.I. Ivanenko admitted that he had earlier offered his service and cooperation with the St. Irineaus of Lyon Center, which is directed by respondent A.L. Dvorkin. Dvorkin rejected him, citing the fact that S.I. Ivanenko had received monetary funds from the Moonists. This way, the court considers, that the testimony of witness S.I. Ivanenko is the testimony of a person who is interested only in the outcome of the case.

In assessing the fact of human rights violations and application of violence on individuals in "totalitarian sects," the court examined the testimony of witnesses. In doing that the court proceeded from the fact that in the RF, crimes against people, like beating and rape, are criminally punished only in the event that the victim initiates the filing a criminal case (when the issue is not about grave consequences). Therefore when it comes to cases of the beatings of members of new religious organizations in Russia: if the victims do not consider it possible for them to appeal to law enforcement agencies to hold the perpetrators accountable, then initiating a criminal case and executing sentence is not even possible by this fact.

The fact of human rights violations upon the individual, including application of violence on a person who after initiating a criminal case in a law enforcement agency, drops the case, can be verified by the testimony of the witness, who indicates potential losses, contingent upon them intending to talk about these facts in civil proceedings.

By this argument about the refutation in the legal system of information about violence which is discrediting to another person, the mission of the court is not to establish guilt by an actual person in perpetrating violence and holding them to criminal accountability for this, but in establishing whether the correspondence to reality of the mentioned information about the application of violence to people who have gone into a "totalitarian" sect. The impermissibility of using violence is fixed by international standards about human rights, the RF Constitution and the Declaration of rights and freedoms of people in the RF.

A.L. Dvorkin's opinion about the use of violence on members of "totalitarian" sects, including beating and rape, is founded in numerous publications about this. The correspondence to reality of these assertions by A.L. Dvorkin are also corroborated by witnesses appearing at the court hearing: Prof. Georgas Krippas (Greece). Prof. Claire Champollion (France), Pastor Thomas Gandow (FRG), Prof. Johannes Aargord (Denmark), E.N. Volkov (Russia), Ya.I. Lutsenko (Gromov), Prof. Yu.I. Polischuk (Russia), G.V. Shamova (Russia), T.V. Kharlamova (Russia), V.G. Portnov (Russia) and others.

Not having a basis either for recognition of the noncorrespondence to reality of A.L. Dvorkin's assertion on page 7 of the brochure about the "goal of all totalitarian sects is not only to recruit any unsuspecting young person, but to come to power. They do not strive to get there directly; they invest the means, increase their influence and make preparations to seize power. Consequently they do not burden themselves with attempts to appeal to the masses; but recruit the leadership cadre for future years." Wrenching A.L. Dvorkin's phrases out of context that the "goal of all totalitarian sects ... is to come to power ... They invest the means, increase their influence and prepare to seize power," the plaintiffs consider that "in this way the brochure's author faults members of religious organizations of preparations to seize power or the same organized activity as provided for by art. 72 of the RF criminal code, directed toward the execution of an especially dangerous state crime." Meanwhile the plaintiffs emphasize that "in evaluation of this assertion it also followed to have in mind that according to the Committee's information there lacks the initiation of a criminal case or a standing court verdict in accordance with art. 64-71 of the RF criminal code in relation to any members of the religious organizations mentioned by A.L. Dvorkin."

Meanwhile the plaintiffs deliberately pass over in silence the paragraph after the one they contest in A.L. Dvorkin's brochure, in which he illustrates the ideas about the goals of all totalitarian sects coming to power: "This strategy was clearly and unequivocally proclaimed by Moon in January 1990: "During the fall of the Roman empire Christians inherited government posts of various sorts... I clearly see that if our members, besides the moral perfection which they attained by following Reverend Moon, also attain professional maturity, our opportunities in Eastern Europe will be unlimited. Someone needs to inherit the state posts of the collapsed Communist empire, and the present leaders are seriously lacking. So we ought to look at the 90s with hope." (p. 7, para. 3).

A.L. Dvorkin took this quotation from the Moonist newspaper, "Unification News" of January 1990.

It is typical that the plaintiffs did not dispute the authenticity of this assertion by Moon and the correctness of A.L. Dvorkin's reference to source and word-for-word reproduction of the citation.

Meanwhile the reproduction by A.L. Dvorkin of Moon's pronouncement of January 1990 certainly contains a statement that "totalitarian" sects have a goal of coming to power and that "reverend" Moon envisions this goal and had intended to implement it in the capacity of limitless opportunities in Eastern Europe. Moreover, witness for the plaintiff, K.V. Krylov, Chairman of the Council of the "Unification Church" in Russia, admitted that this citation can be interpreted as an endeavor to seize power.

That Scientology and its founder L. Ron Hubbard put such a goal forward is seen in numerous of Hubbard's declarations about the need to "clear the planet" (do this with Scientology) and others.

The "Manifest Varnashram" the "International Society of Krishna Consciousness" also contains statements which can be interpreted as endeavors to come to power:

"Brahmins really resolved which knowledge and information they had to hand over (this is about information control) ... With editors, script writers, journalists and producers the program had to be Brahmin, fully capable of managing society. Brahmins, directing by means of information, will use this means for the same goal as their present materialistic director, to ensure the stability of society, but under management of the Brahmins the progressive spiritual society will be life-enabling, and not blinded with materialism ... Besides the service which they render for the divinity, Brahmins and the society of Varnashram (which is the society that the SocKriCon proposes to introduce), will also direct man in his personal life for the good of each individual can appeal to the Brahmin at any time. Brahmins, fulfilling a role of home cleric and teacher, will give advice on the correct conduct of Vedic rituals for the various circumstances of family life, such as marriage or conception of offspring... If society can transform itself, recognizing spiritual values, then it is very important that its leaders firmly defend the interests of this spiritual society throughout the world. Only demonic persons will render armed resistance, using everything possible to defend atheism and materialism. Such persons are fitting candidates for corrective measure being applied to them. Only in this way will the world rid itself of the trouble they cause... Citizens in the Varnashram system have to repeat the name of Lord Krishna individually and together with others ... Kshatri is not only administrator and police, but also a war that is supposed to repel the attacks of an aggressive and covetous enemy, and if need be, to also attack him. If at the time that the Varnashram society is confirmed there are still troublesome nations, guided by dependence and demonic principles, the Varnashram society will take a stand against them and win... Until then, the Earth is now populated with elements who by their very nature contradict the consciousness of God and god-centered arrangement of the word, the military organization of the society of Varnashram must be up to the mark. Wars that are waged only to allow only one narrow political or economic system to take the lead over another, of course, are insane. But wars for the sake of establishing a god-centered earth is sometimes necessary... Which one of a group of silly sentimental ideas, not unlike life itself, would let others live in the world, which show their tendency to self-destruction... The Vedas create a complete science of military arts, including creation and application of atomic weapons. Factual Vedic literature contains all branches of knowledge that are necessary in life for people. Every instruction of the Vedas always helps humanity take a step on the road to self-purification. This can be demonstrated in one or two examples: if a person wanted to take a very powerful weapon, a Vedic atomic weapon which can be compared to a modern nuclear bomb of limited capacity, then to learn to use this weapon, he would encounter certain difficulties."

Deserving attention is the argument of the respondent, A.L. Dvorkin, as asserted in paragraph 2 on page 7 of the brochure, the goal of totalitarian sects is to come into power. He did not have in mind the violent armed coming into power, and subsequently, he did not talk about the actions of totalitarian sects qualified in art. 72 of the RF criminal code or art. 64-71 of the RF criminal code.

In saying that sects are making "preparations to seize power," A.L. Dvorkin immediately shows that this is expressed in the recruitment of "the leadership cadre for future years." In as much as, in A.L. Dvorkin's opinion, "by the arrangement of its leaders and their intrusion into the state system (filling of state posts)" the intention of sects to come into power should be realized.

The court considers this argument of A.L. Dvorkin as substantiated.

This opinion of A.L. Dvorkin's, apart from the quotes he made with reference to the "Manifest" of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness and the statements of S.M. Moon, have corroboration in the following materials and information:

Moon's words, cited in Steven Hassan's book "Combating Cult Mind Control), which A.L. Dvorkin's brochure refers to: "When our hour arrives, we have to bring to power over the world an automatic theocracy <this is a government by God through his earthly representatives>. So, we cannot separate politics from religion... The division between religion and politics is what Satan loves most of all" (Master Speaks, May 17, 1973). When we come to power in America, we will need to change the Constitution and introduce the death penalty for any who are caught in the physical proximity of any other person except those were prescribed for him."

Material of the "Bogorodichny Center," presented as a revelation of the "bogorodits" to the "archbishop Joanna" (Bereslavska), published in the book "Bogorodichny Center" "The Dawn of Holy Russia Rises" (1993): "Here's my first Order: on the oath to Russia at the foot of the Pure Maiden, the Supreme Sovereign herself. I will bring people before Your agents, and also stated omens and signs ... An unprecedented new exceptional civilization stands ahead. To power literally in the course of several years will come politicians of a fundamentally new type. They differ from the profound realization of the satanic precept (in Russian's recent past, its immersion in layers of cursedness, etc.), zealous readiness to disavow the seal of the devil ... Here I will put a prophet and saint as governor Your State. Who do I mean by plenipotentiaries, governors, ministers and eparchial chiefs? Zealots of Christian truth, graduates of the Bogorodichny School and swearing by the Cross."

To the court were submitted quotes from Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard about the necessity to "clear the planet" (with Scientology) and the contract for a billion years for the introduction of Scientology ethics on this planet and in the whole Universe, which enlists people to appear in the internal elite Scientology "Sea organization." Why, "ethics", by L. Ron Hubbard's definition, is understood as the "ridding the world of contrary viewpoints. Thanks to this general progress is possible."

To the court was also submitted the text of the official presentation by the Bavarian (FRG) Interior Minister, Dr. Gunther Beckstein of March 12, 1997 at a session of the Conference of state representatives on issues of sectarianism in Rotenburg, in which he remarked that, according to the decisions of numerous courts, Scientology was striving "not for religious goals, but for money and power; for financial exploitation and subordination of the people's psyche, subordination of the business structure, high as possible profit and distribution of its influence in the economy and society. This means: under the guise of a religious association Scientology combines elements of economic crime and psychic terror... Behind this sect is concealed a criminal organization for money laundering; Scientology spreads a blinding ideology; Scientology is a misanthropic cartel of oppression; its creators are criminals and its members are subject to brainwashing. The priority ideological goal of Scientology is purifying (clearing) people and the planet," wherein "We should all be Scientologists." These were the words of Bavarian State Interior Minister, Doctor Gunther Beckstein, which he pronounced a month ago at a conference in Bavaria. The authenticity of Dr. Beckstein's presentation and identification of the text submitted to the court which he presented was verified by the respondent's witness from Germany, Pastor Thomas Gandow.

The court does not have a basis either to approve the plaintiff's demand about refutation in the legal system of A.L. Dvorkin's assertions in the brochure that religious organizations, which he calls "totalitarian sects," "do not stop at lying, stealing, deceiving people, resorting to controlling the consciousness of their brethren or, finally, defaming official and social figures who give them opposition and even physically removing people (or groups of people) who disagree with them.) In essence, we have a business with a mafia-like structure."

The assertions by A.L. Dvorkin that are disputed by the plaintiffs are laid out in paragraph 2 on page 9, and for evaluation of the content of this paragraph it is necessary for the court to reproduce it in full context: "So as all totalitarian sects consider that the end justifies the means, they all put their own personal interests above the law. They all have a peculiar 'double moral' and a 'double standard.' If they order their members to think the product they deliver is 'fair' and 'just,' they do not then stop at lying, stealing or cheating people, they resort to controlling the consciousness of colleagues or, finally, defamation of government personnel and public figures who offer them resistance, and even physically remove people (or a group of people) they find objectionable. In essence, we are dealing with Mafia-like structures, bound with an iron discipline and unquestioning obedience to leadership."

This opinion of A.L. Dvorkin's about "totalitarian sects" is based on an article published in "Time" magazine on May 6, 1991, which contains analogous information and, in particular, "the church is a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner" and also from the chapter on the "Moonist Mafia" from Zh. F. Buaya's book "Empire of Moon", and facts cited from the book by J. Haber and L. Gruson, "Monkey on a Stick," for example, in the chapter about contact and cooperation in crime with the Mafia of the director of one of the branches of the "Society of Krishna Consciousness."

As far as sects controlling the consciousness of their members, the plaintiffs, in essence, have communicated in a written explanation in support of their legal demand. For instance, L.S. Levinson, in giving an explanation for the lawsuit in the capacity of a representative of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, indicated: "Polemics about new religious movements are appropriate and should have a place. But there is no basis to bring it to court. There are, for example, various points of view on the influence of one or another religious practice on mental health: but this is a scientific question. There is the concept of "brainwashing, about which many speak in connection with new religious movements, but this does not relate to the topic of our lawsuit. The Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience considers it essential to strictly adhere to the topic of the lawsuit so as to not clutter up the proceedings with materials that do not have a bearing to the lawsuit... In this lawsuit the Committee does not recommend the demand to refute other information contained in the respondent's brochure, in particular about "destructive cults' 'controlling consciousness,' or about methods of "recruitment," or about religious practices causing harm to mental health, etc. ... We believe that these questions and concepts in the brochure on the whole are topics for scientific, religious expert discussion. We do not consider it necessary to contest in court the evaluative assertions of the brochure's author or his conclusions. This is an issue for open discussion that has been in scientific and social circles for more than a decade and, in our opinion, the given problem should not be the topic of a legal lawsuit about the refutation of disparaging information" (l.d. 66, t. 10).

The facts that A.L. Dvorkin put down in paragraph 2 on page 9 have been verified for the court by abundant investigatory information.

About the use of violence on its members in the "Bogorodichny Center" (beating of adepts), forcing them to shower with ice water on the street in January in the middle of Russia, rape, torture by starvation, exhausting physical labor and deprivation of sleep, malicious derision of children, including that of a profoundly amoral character, was given as testimony to the court by witnesses T.V. Kharlamova and Ya.I. Lutsenko (Gromov).

Concerning other new religious organizations, in defense of the business reputations of which were made court demands by L.S. Levinson, M.S. Osadchev and N.A. Balukova, A.L. Dvorkin's book indicates only that the "Church of Christ" often operates as a group or society for the study of Biblical literature; the "Family" sect (same as "Children of God") is presented as an "Association of independent Christian missionary communities" (p. 18); "Self-proclaimed Christ, Vissarion (Sergei Torop), used to work as a policeman. The very first Mormon, Joseph Smith, began his spiritual career with spiritism and treasure hunting, at the same time as the godfather of Jehovism, Charles Taiz Russell, from 11 years old was a small shopkeeper (p. 20); "... the ardent preacher of divine love, "Family" sect founder David Berg, in his senior years hid from all the world, laid in some hole and surrounded himself with a harem of young girls, openly gathering porn video material about the members of his sect..." (p. 22).

None of the plaintiffs contest that this information, which A.L. Dvorkin put in the brochure, that this information corresponds to reality.

Plaintiffs L.S. Levinson and M.S. Osadchev, in considering themselves to be members of these new religious movements, as well as of the Society for Krishna Consciousness, the Scientology Church, the Unification Church, the Bogorodichny Center and the plaintiff N.A. Balukova, to the church of Christ, in their legal statements do not ask about recognition that the information does not correspond to reality, in connection to which the Bogorodichny center, Church of Christ, "Family" Christian mission, Church of the Last Testament (followers of Vissarion), Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons), and Jehovahs Witnesses are mentioned in A.L. Dvorkin's brochure, and do not contest the facts in connection with which these religious organizations are mentioned.

The plaintiffs dispute the correspondence to reality only of four of A.L. Dvorkin's phrases in the introduction to his brochure. In those four no actual nontraditional religious organizations are named. The respondents -- A.L. Dvorkin and the representative of the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy clergyman Aleksei Uminskiy, and also the Chairman of the Publishing Council of the Moscow Patriarchy, Bishop Tikhon, and public representative M.V. Gerasimova -- all plead that A.L. Dvorkin's four assertions, which are contested by the plaintiffs, on the whole relate to international new religious movements (organizations), in relation to which opinions have already been formed and facts exposed about the violation in them of human rights, the commission of crimes by managers and members of the organizations, unquestioning subordination of members of these organizations by their managers and the iron discipline that exists within the organization, often leading to distortion of basic moral norms. The plaintiffs claim that in order for these statements of A.L. Dvorkin to correspond to reality, they be rated by the court in relation to Russian new religious organizations. Therefore they demand the presentation by the respondents of court verdicts that pertain to Russian organizations. A.L. Dvorkin's brochure was published by the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy with the goal of notifying the Russian public about these associations, already known worldwide, and the danger of totalitarian sects and the necessity of balancing the principle of freedom of practice of religion, which they use, with accounts of attained information about numerous facts of disgusting experiences of people who have gone into international new religious organizations. Moreover, that these new religious organizations, created in Russia, have management centers abroad and only with the dogma of international organizations.

The problem of ensuring the observation of human rights in new religious organizations that have sprouted up in Russia and the protection of Russians from potential sources of harm to them from these organizations, international centers which have bad reputations or negative experiences, are also relevant in Russia.

Issues of causing harm to the public, which appear in new religious organizations, destroying their families, cutting off their social life, "fragmenting" their psyches, removal of property from them, have a bearing at the general state level.

This problem was included in the pre-election campaign program in the last presidential term of RF President B.N. Yeltsin: "Russia: people, family, society and state. Program of activity for 1996-2000." In section II of this program, "Priorities of new politics" in item 1.3 "Freedom of the practice of religion," it indicates "... justifiable anxiety on the occasion of the presence in the Russian religious sphere of foreign missionary organizations. The access by representatives of foreign cult organizations and sectarian groups to Russian state mass media was accomplished without adequate foundation. Strict control is necessary for the observation of human rights, the rights of those who believe in the system established by the Russian legislators. There needs to be assurance of protection for the public from spiritual aggression.

In Russia in recent years have appeared totalitarian sects that have an influence destructive to personality. Young people who fall under their influence are cut off from their families and from society and, in the assessment of experts, acquire irreversible pathological changes to psyche. In preserving the right to freedom of the practice of religion, we are creating a defense mechanism against totalitarian cults" (l.d. 160, t.5).

This question was given serious consideration by the RF Administration and State Duma. For instance, "Analytical Messenger" issue 28 for 1996, State Duma of the Federal Assembly, Parliament of the Russian Federation in the section "On the national threat to Russia on the part of destructive religious organizations" published the analytical analysis of State Duma Deputy N.V. Krivelskaya on the problems of practice of religion and religious activity, affecting the assurance of RF national security, under the name "On the social-medical consequences of the influence of several religious organizations on the health of the individual, family, society and measures ensuring aid to victims." This analysis was given in connection with the resolution of the RF Administration of May 17, 1996 No. 600 "On the Federal purpose-oriented program about intensification of the fight against crime 1996-1997," which set a goal to unite the material on the social and medical consequences of the operation in Russia of foreign religious organizations, to prepare a proposal about the system of implementing the activity of these organizations on the territory of Russia, and also about measures of responsibility of their management and members for fomenting interdenominational and interethnical discord, incitement of population groups to civil disobedience, who fall under their influence, for criminal activity. In fulfillment of the indicated Resolution by the Health Ministry of Russia jointly with interested ministries, departments and organizations carried out work to develop measures ensuring aid for victims of some religious movements. The work published by N.V. Krivelskaya specifically states the following:

(BEGIN QUOTE of extracts from article in "Analytical Messenger" issue 28 for 1996, State Duma of the Federal Assembly, Parliament of the Russian Federation in the section "On the national threat to Russia on the part of destructive religious organizations", an analysis by State Duma Deputy N.V. Krivelskaya)

"In the Russian Federation at the present time a multitude of sects operate, including totalitarian and those strictly managed from abroad. Research by experts in Russia's Internal Affairs Ministry (IAM) indicates that our law enforcement agencies are running into an increasing number of rights violations on the part of totalitarian sects. There are considered to be more than fifty just of the large sects in our country... In Moscow nearly 80 sects just of Korean origin have been noted. Criminalizatin of sects may be observed. The community has been exposed to the landscape of crime and totalitarian sectarian organizations through internal structures, employing means and methods. Extremely dangerous active attempts have been made to infiltrate by sectarians or their sympathizers into state structures. People who are members of one or another of the world religions, consolidate a common understanding of moral and spiritual values and principles, but sectarians most of all use the authority of the teachings and personal relationships with other sect members ... The iron all-penetrating organization of sects and their efforts are to fully take possession of the person, orient him exclusively within the sect and destroy all of his open connections with the world. In the opinion of Russia's IAM experts this is actually totalitarianism: cultivating blind obedience to authority (even sometimes small groups), rigorous organization, and general control of all sides of life of sect members. Criminalization at the top of the sect inevitably criminalizes the entire sect, who change into blind instruments to realize the goals of every sort of "guru," "teacher," "corporate" manager, etc. The danger of totalitarian sects follows from the criminal tendencies of their internal life, zombifying their members, form of activity against traditional religions and other sects, and methods of recruiting new converts. "Zombification" is one of the numerous methods of psychologically processing adepts (ordinary members) of the sect, which allows control of their psyche and guidance of their behavior. Sects have an extremely destructive influence on the health of all levels of a functioning society: individual (level of personality), microsocial (level of family, social group and work collective), macrosocial (level of all society). The consequences of the influence of totalitarian religious organizations on the psychic health of the individual has been investigated by a commission made up of leading psychiatrists, scientific center officials of Russia's Health Ministry, including V.P. Serbsky BMC social and psychiatric and Moscow's Scientific Research Institute of Psychiatry. The Commission, on the basis of an analysis of letters and requests, sent to the Committee for the Salvation of Youth, to editors of a number of newspaper, to the prosecutor, Internal Affairs Ministry and other departments, on the basis of direct investigation of people who have gone into psychiatric hospitals in a state of psychosis with delirium of a pseudoreligious nature, arising after being in a sect, and patients who go to psychiatrists after being in a sect, and also on the basis of interviews with members and leaders of sects, has come to the following conclusions: 1. Activities of the organizations "Beloe Bratstvo," "Bogorodichny Center," "Aum Shinrikyo," "Krishna Consciousness," "Church of Scientology" etc. are associated with inflicting serious harm to the psychic, physical and moral health of the individual and his personality. 2. Harm inflicted to health in these organizations appears in the form of induced delirium, delirium-like stress, pathological supersignificant ideas and pathological development of personality, as well as psychic and physical exhaustion, which predisposes them to other illnesses, and cessation of human reproductive function. 3. Incipient disturbances are accompanied by profound family and social de-adaptation of the personality, putting them outside family, society and state. 4. The activity of transferring to organizations inflicts harm to the health of those drawn into them who are psychically ill and those with anomalous personalities, which leads to development in them of more serious psychic disturbances. 5. The activity of the indicated organizations inflicts serious moral and property damage to the families of people who are drawn into these organizations. 6. The harm to the health and personality of a person is inflicted as a result of covert psychic violence and manipulation of the person's consciousness in the form of preaching, rites, rituals, owing to concentrated admonishments in states of artificially altered consciousness, right up to deep hypnosis and self-hypnosis, which sets in as a result of applying certain psychotechnical methods during the liturgy, rite, initiation or meditation. 7. The activity of the founders of the above-indicated religious organizations (associations), through the realization of their right to freedom of conscience and practice of religion, contradict part 3 art. 17 RF Constitution, which determines that the realization of rights and freedoms of persons and individuals shall not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons... Active application of psychotropic substances in sect violates the foundation of the Russian nation. Since the methods of influence upon psychic health, as used by sects, are typical, then one can talk about the listed consequences as characteristic for many sects ... The structure of the "Jehovahs Witnesses" sect has strict hierarchic subordination to management of all its branches in Russia to the Management Corporation at the head with president Henshel (USA, New York, Brooklyn). In meetings is also demanded from each member utter devotion to the organization and unimpeachable subordination to elders, the overseers of the assembly. Four years after registration the "Jehovahs Witnesses" sect covered all Russia with a network of its centers, organizing hundreds of communities in various cities and regions of the country... In its computer database the Management Center has complete biographical particulars about all the members of the sect in our country, as well as individuals who reside in the territorial sphere of their influence, all of which are forwarded to Brooklyn. ... The cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg, in particular, are divided into "processing areas, by a number of assemblies organized in the cities of 150-200 people each. Overseers of the assemblies, and district and regional foreign overseers not only "control the spiritual situation in the assemblies," but also subordinate to their dictates the way of life, ideas, psyche and behavior of each member of the sect. The state has a powerful anti-state, anti-social and anti-traditional, including anti-Christian, current, and applies a ban on participation by the person in the life of government and society. This sect for religious reasons forbids its adepts to have a blood transfusion even in cases that threaten the life of the sect member or his child, which has already had fatal consequences. The activities of this sect has been forbidden in several dozen countries.

In the Vissarion sect ("Church of the Last Testament"), the center of which is located in south Krasnodar Krai, is believed to have more than 10,000 people at the present time who are on an "aggressive" diet examplary of Nazi concentration camps, during which even nursing mothers are forbidden to given their milk to children ... The "commandments" of Vissarion have had alarming results, in essence justifying suicide.

Calls to murder and to suicide and encouragement thereto are often contained in the religious practices of a number of sects operating in Russia. For example, the "Church of Scientology" founded by L. Ron Hubbard, and considered one of the most aggressive totalitarian sects in the world, in a "Code of Honor for Scientologists" exhort: Never fear to hurt another for a just cause; Your self-determination and your honor are more important than your present life' Your integrity is more important than your body ... These concepts discard the ban on deeds like murder and suicide.

These same appeals are seen in the books of Bereslavsky, director of the "Bogorodichny Center" sect: "It's impossible to work for a minute on yourself, to want something for yourself. The decision is needed to kill yourself. This is exactly the sacrifice that the Lord calls for."

Members of many sects are systematically undernourished and deprived of sleep, which also has a destructive influence on health. The most valuable food products are excluded from rations. Eating happens once a day and sleep is limited to 3-4 hours a day. On a background of physical and psychic exhaustion is created a predisposition for incipient psychic illness and somatic illness... Various new cult formations already have three to five million people, 70 percent of them young people ages 18 to 27 years. Eighty percent of adepts have: advanced or average education; students, nearly one million people of which 25-30 percent have experienced harm. Up to 250,000 families have been destroyed, with no less a number of minor children left without parents who are in the sect. The chance of leaving a sect, one in a thousand, is practically impossible, and going home means as a semi-invalid, not able to work, study and not having roots in social life. In many sects the model of existence for the adept is constructed in such a way that he must refuse his former inclinations, habits and connections, including family.

For example, in Moon's sect many members are called upon to limit contact with parents, family and friends, if they do not sympathize with Moonism. Regarding parents, Moon gives guidelines to use as much as possible "nutritious substance, ingredients of manure."

In the book of Bereslavsky, director of the "Bogorodichny center," it indicates: "Earth mother is the prototype of a demon. Earth father is the prototype of satan. Demons act through the mother. She takes energy away from the son. He walks like a corpse and his blood witch kills the world. The past is subject to total renunciation, fully cursed with its culture, ideals, philosophy and utopias."

... Sects have an extremely destructive influence not only on the health of individuals, families (social groups, work collectives), but also on the health of society at large, causing sociopathic behavior and violations of law... In literature published by the "Bogorodichny Center," there are appeals, directed at causing physical and mental harm to individual health, to fail to fulfill civil obligations, such as refusal to marry, have a family, feed children, study, and social-useful work.

Many totalitarian sects, which on the territory of Russia receive official support and patronage by state and municipal agencies, are widely known in the West for tax evasion, numerous court cases about inflicting physical and psychic harm upon their members with various anti-social and anti-state activity, including covert infiltration into state agencies, right up to state conspiracy, as was the case in the "Aum Shinrikyo" sect.

Operating in Russia for thirty years so-called "Dianetics," a recruitment structure for the "Church of Scientology," which is defined by German state agencies as a "criminal commercial organization with elements of psychoterror," and some of its adepts in Greece are suspected of espionage... For society the danger lies in the Scientology goal of remaking society in its own form. In a society like that, which operated on the basis of the principles of Scientology, there would be no place for the rights and freedoms contained in the Constitution... Under destructive cults ... can be classified: Unification Church (Moon's sect); Church of Scientology (Dianetics, Hubbard colleges, Narconon); Hare Krishna (International Society of "Krishna Consciousness"); "Jehovahs Witnesses," Church of Christ (Boston Church); "Aum Shinrikyo," "Beloe Bratstvo," "Bogorodichny Center" (Marianskaya Church), "Vissarion" (Church of the Last Testament), "Children of God" ("Family of Love").

... An alarming situation has developed in Russia connected with widespread and uncontrolled use and popularization of sect methods and means of psychological and psychotherapeutic influence, which despite law have not obtained official licenses from Russia's Health Ministry or are implemented by people who have no medical training or state license.

... In recognizing the dangerous consequences of the infiltration of sects into the spheres of health and health care Russia's Health Ministry has issued two orders. The first of these "On regulating application of methods of psychological and psychotherapeutic influence," does not permit application of methods or means of occult-mystical or religious origin in the practice of health care.

... The limitations introduced by the order, are called to establish legal order and legality in the sphere of medicine, to assure the right of citizens to security for life and health. They by no means signify a lessening of his right to freedom of conscience and freedom to practice religion, in as much as not one of the traditional religions that operate on the territory of our country have their "special" confessional methods of prevention, cure and rehabilitation and do not approve of their followers refusing the assistance of official medicine. No special "Orthodox medicine," "Islamic medicine," "Jewish medicine," etc. exists.

The second order of the RF Health Ministry "On the repeal of the methodical recommendation of the 'Detoxification program'" does not permit the application in health care practice of the detoxification methods or other methods extracted from L.R. Hubbard's teachings on Scientology or Dianetics. The indicated measure stipulates that the methodology developed by L.R. Hubbard and his claims to medical value, could not pass state licensing in one country in the world and does not have permission for application. Moreover, government expert opinion forming in a number of countries indicates the antiscientific and destructive effects of L.R. Hubbard's methods on the human body and psyche. World science literature and a long list of court records reflect numerous cases of serious harm being inflicted upon patients, up to the point of fatal outcome, cases involving serious psychic illness, approaching suicide.

According to information from Russia's Internal Affairs Ministry, the Scientology sect is one of the many manifestations of the so-called satanic sects, which have extremely strong criminal tendencies.

... Two daughter Scientology organizations operate: Narconon and Hubbard college. Narconon was founded in the middle 1960s in the USA by convicted criminal and drug addict U. Benites. Narconon called itself a rehabilitation program for alcoholics and drug addicts.

Using Narconon methods Scientology carried out experiments exposing subjects to influence on the psyche every day over a period of months, and then six months. One of the doctors who managed the execution of the purifying "marathons" (five-hour runs), admitted that they were "potentially fatal."

"Marathon" victims underwent purification coming off drug intoxification. Leading dieticians note that super high doses of vitamin B1, which are used in the "marathon," can evoke a feeling of displacement and hallucination.

Claims about attaining clear-cut cures of drug addicts are without the slightest bit of proof and have never been verified by objective statistics in a medical clinic.

... A special commission of the Australian state of Victoria, which was created to investigate the organization, established: Scientology is evil; its techniques and methods are evil; its application and practice is a serious threat for society from a medical, moral and social point of view.

The Church of Scientology actively applies psychotropic substances with the goal of obtained a manageable type of personality in its adepts. Sect guidelines, as with the majority of other sects of this type, have a specially created structure of concealment, involving external charitable activity, which includes the Humanitarian Hubbard Center.

Scientology declares that it is apolitical and that church and state should be separate. Meanwhile one of the global missions of the sect is declared as the clear creation of a civilization without insanity, crime, war, drugs, etc. To create this kind of civilization it would be necessary for Scientology to be totally assimilated into all spheres of life, most of all including government agencies. Before he died, Hubbard himself talked about his Second Coming, which would be in the role of a politician. He also asserted that: Scientology ... must bring and establish total power and authority to obtain total discipline. Therefore Scientology actively recruits high level management and businessmen through a system of Hubbard colleges (study of administration technology). One of the goals of Scientology is the expulsion of traditional psychiatry in order to occupy its place in the government. Attacks on psychiatry are a constant theme in their books, its pathological unpleasantries have taken root with the sectarians. One can imagine what power this sect would have in Russia if it attains control over the entire public psyche.

The police of many countries have recognized that Scientology organizations have formed a large espionage network that gathers information by legal and illegal methods (including of military and confidential character). For example, several high level managers of the sect, including Hubbard's wife were convicted in the US in 1977 for systematic theft of secret documents from the Army, Navy, revenue service, CIA, court buildings and others. Criminal operations are also contained in the auditing procedures, which basically are an unlicensed practice of psychiatry.

... According to a statement to the press of the Regular Conference of Federal and State Interior Ministers of German No. 19/94 of May 6, 1994: "The organization of Scientologists has presented itself to agencies of internal security, empowered to conduct a criminal investigation and defend society, as an organization, which under the guise of a religious association combines in itself elements of economic crime and psychoterror in relation to its own members with economic operations and sectarian tendencies. The basis of its activity is in the sphere of economic crime" (l.d. 29-34, t. 2).


December 11, 1996, the RF State Duma passed a resolution "On the dangerous consequences of the influence of several religious organizations to the health of society, families and citizens of Russia." It was adopted and published in the "Rossisky Gazete" as an open letter from the deputies of the State Duma of the RF Federal Assembly to the President of Russia.

It indicated the need to take active measures to guarantee religious security. It did make the suggestion to consider the religious security of Russia an important priority of national security, on a level with the military, political, economic, ecological and social (l.d. 25-27, t. 4)

On December 6, 1996, the RF government sounded the "alarm on the occasion of increased activity of religious associations that have obtained for themselves a scandalous reputation in many of the world's countries." "Using imperfections in the legal regulation system of registering foreign religious associations and controlling their operations on the territory of Russia, these organizations have created branched networks of offices in a number of regions.

In citizens drawn into the activities of several new religious formations, totalitarian in nature, have taken root an asocial establishment: enmity to national spiritual culture, to Russian customs and traditions, to familial and parental obligations. In law enforcement agencies, information has appeared about growing psychic changes in people drawn into cult organizations of the destructive type.

Russian legal science and practice, its administrative and criminal systems still do not have sufficient experience in counteracting destructive cults. Criminal prosecution of these facts does not get the necessary proliferation."

In connection with this it is indicated that "for the regulation of the problems under review it is necessary for an appropriate federal legislative act, which grants agencies the executive power to authorize the passing of preventive measures regarding destructive religious organizations and to coordinate the operations of federal ministers, departments and subjects of the Federation in the sphere of realizing the right to freedom of conscience" (l.d. 28, t. 4).

"In July 1995 the government of the Russian Federation introduced into the State Duma in the system of legislative initiatives a proposed Federal law "On the insertion and addition in RSFSR Law "On freedom of practice of religion," which passed in the first reading. The Committee on matters of social associations and religious organizations of the State Duma with participation by representatives of the Apparatus of the Government of the Russian Federation, continues the work under them.

Passage of the law would be the first step on the road to removing the legal vacuum in the sphere of controlling activities of foreign religious organizations and their representatives. In accordance with article 11 of the RSFSR law "On freedom of practice of belief," the state implements control not over the activities of religious associations, but over the observance of legislation on freedom of practice of belief. At the same time the legislative proposal foresees the position in which the agencies that register religious organizations realize control over the observance of the charter in relation to the goals of its activities" (l.d. 28, t.4).

In connection with the reasons, deserving attention, given by A.L. Dvorkin about the present lawsuit submitted by the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience in the time preparing to pass the Federal Law "On freedom of conscience and religious associations" is the intention to mobilize their own efforts and the efforts of sects to counteract the passage of this law.

In this attention is merited to the reaction of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and Gleb Yakunin to the Order of the RF Health Minister No. 254 of June 19, 1996, "On the repeal of the methodical recommendation of the 'Detoxification program.'" Publication of this order, as indicated in the "Analytical messenger of the State Duma" iss. 28 shows that "infiltrating into medicine, the indicated organizations (totalitarian sects) violate legislation of the Russian Federation, which requires that medical and pharmaceutical activity be conducted by the available medically trained personnel, certified specialists, licensed for the given form of activity and licensed by the Health Ministry of Russia for the application of preparations or methods of influence on the human body." In Order No. 254 of June 19, 1996 the Medical Health Ministry of Russia directly indicates the impermissibility of using methods of detoxification in medical institutions that in the absence of state licensing call for the methods of L.R. Hubbard, in connection with which the application of these methods and their influence on the human body and mind are dangerous. Not contesting these facts, the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience in the person of Gleb Yakunin made a statement for the mass media about the "Health Ministry conducts ideological cleansing" ("Ekspress-Khronica", August 9, 1996, No. 32) (l.d. 4-5, t.5). This by itself testifies as to the one-sided (without consideration for established law requiring the application of methods and means of cure and without thought about the people) tendency of the valuation of the Public Committee for the Protection of the Freedom of Conscience for the actions of the RF Health Ministry.

"The analytical note about the activity of religious associations with the prevalence of young people" was prepared by the sub-committee on issues of children and young people of the Committee for issues of women, family and youth of the FS RF State Duma. In it a conclusion was drawn about the link between the active luring of teens and youth into new religions and changes in their psyches and conduct, increases in psychopathic conditions; about the increasing influence of new religions on rearing children and familial relations destroying the national traditions that have been formed in Russia, undermining the sovereignty and security of the state, becoming a process of training the next generation for the control of a force, profoundly alien to the interests of Russia; and that activity of this type of association creates a threat of genocide of the Russian people (l.d. 48-60, t.4).

Conclusions about psychic disturbances arising in people who are drawn into sects was given by Professor of Moscow's RF Scientific Research Institute of Psychiatry Yu.I. Polischuk (l.d. 61-69, t. 4; l.d. 93-100, t. 4)

Questioned in the capacity of a witness, he confirmed his conclusions about available causes of valid connections between people drawn into totalitarian sects and methods of influence used on them in the sect and psychiatric illnesses that show up in these people; about the danger of totalitarian sects, and in particular, "Bogorodichny Center," "Aum Shinrikyo," "Beloe Bratstvo," and "Krishna Consciousness" (l.d. 93-100, t. 4).

An analogous conclusion was given by the Commission for the medical-psychological and legal valuation of the activities of several religious organizations (l.d. 61-69, t.4).

The plaintiffs explained their disagreement with these conclusions of the psychiatrists with extracts from the testimony of witness Yu.S. Savenko, Cand.Med.Sci., which was made to the Chairman of the Independent Psychiatric Association, and testimony from witness S.A. Bogdanova, scientific staff at the Institute of Complex Research (St. Petersburg).

Witness Yu.S. Savenko indicated that he could not agree with the conclusion of prof. Polischuk, because he believed that a link was absent between psychic disturbances that arose in individual people and their appearance in nontraditional religious organizations. Witness Yu.S. Savenko based his conclusion on a reference to a study carried out by the Independent Psychiatric Association on individual members of the nontraditional religious organization "Aum Shinrikyo." During this Yu.S. Savenko was forced to admit that the choice of members of this organization for evaluation of their mentality was carried out by the doctors themselves, but of a definite number of dossiers on members of "Aum Shinrikyo," representing managers of this religious organization; how many were really members of this organization and why, by which indications exactly was information collected about these persons, the psychiatrists could not explain. Besides that, witness Yu.S. Savenko admitted that the psychiatrists examined from this group only a small number of people, and how much this information about them could be generalized to the entire group, the quantity of which was not known, he was not able to explain. In this Yu.S. Savenko admitted that the research was conducted by the order of the religious organization itself, and the experts themselves were paid for this work. Under those circumstances the court is not able to recognize as founded these methods of examination or the conclusion of the Independent Psychiatric Association about the influence of nontraditional religious organizations upon the human mind.

With the help of these same methods a study was conducted on the Russian Society for Krishna Consciousness by witness S.A. Bogdanov, who indicated the study was ordered and paid for by the "Center for the Society of Krishna Consciousness in Russia" and that he worked with members of this organization through a list verified by its management. The court is not able to recognize the conclusions of this study as it insufficiently founded.

The testimony of witnesses Yu.S. Savenko and S.A. Bogdanova contradicts the testimony of prof. Yu.I. Polischuk, the Commission under chairmanship of which he worked as truly independent from nontraditional religious organizations and their orders and (financial) means. The conclusions of the Commission testify as to the serious psychic harm on many sect members. Prof. Yu.I. Polischuk testified also about physical violence, applied in a number of "totalitarian sects," members of which he questioned, including "Aum Shinrikyo" and "Bogorodichny Center," and also about attempts at murder and suicide. Witnesses Yu.I. Polischuk and E.N Volkov indicated that members of totalitarian sects received open and hidden psychological violence, produced in methods of reprimand and inducing definite conditions, that, in their words, are the basis of control by sects over the consciousness of their adepts. In this way, the witnesses, proceeding from their experience and professional knowledge, believe that members of "totalitarian sects" are deprived of freedom of choice; they are affected by violation of the principle of voluntary entry into a religious organization.

Witnesses prof. Yu.I. Polischuk and E.N. Volkov recognize that in psychiatry there are various "schools," and in society, various opinions about the influences of nontraditional religious organizations on the mentality of their members. Under these conditions the testimony of witness Yu.S. Savenko does not refute the arguments of the respondents about the right of A.L. Dvorkin to lay out in the brochure his personal opinion about "totalitarian sects," based on concrete acts and publications about them.

Witnesses for the plaintiffs -- members of the "Center for the Society of Krishna Consciousness (SKC) in Russia": V.G. Kritskiy, S.M. Agirzhanokova, S.A. Markon, V.I. Likhchenkov and V.M. Tuneev -- indicate that the Society is engaged with charitable activity; it participates in the distribution of vegetarian food in the "Food for Life" program, which includes the distribution of food in Chechnya; that for this they organize a collection of funds donated by Russians, and also among domestic and foreign state and private structures; that the distribution of food has a ritual character and is dedicated to Krishna; that the organization's "Food for Life" program is an independent legal person; that the "SKC" in Russia, although it has the same belief as does the "International Society of Krishna Consciousness," is an independent Russian legal person and cannot answer for the actions of the Moscow "SKC"; that in the doctrine, the mantra (prayer) in the course of a day for each member is repeated 1,728 times. Nonetheless they do not deny the impartiality of the published calculations, that on the average an "SKC" member spends no less than seven hours a day on religious rituals, that with the necessity to work at "SKC" there remains little time for sleep or for family life." They assert that the practice of religion in the "SKC" is not connected with human rights violations. Meanwhile an article in the Krishna magazine "As it is" for April-June 1993 No. 002, containing a letter of a former pupil of a guru school (Krishna boarding school for children) about being systematically raped by his guru (teacher), and also about other crimes, committed upon him and his friends, including other rapes, beatings and murders, witnesses V.G. Kritskiy, V.I. Likhchenkov and V.M.Tuneev recognized as authentic.

Witness V.G. Portnov, whose daughter was drawn into SKC membership with her five-year-old daughter (V.G. Portnov's granddaughter), indicated that SKC doctrine required separation of its members from relatives, denying them a social life. Portnov's daughter quit work, left home, lived in a Krishna temple, traveled to India, leaving her small daughter there to beg, and she begged herself, collected alms. It's difficult on the minor daughter. She gets no help from her parents and they only visit to ask for money; threaten blackmail if they don't get it, and he never sees his granddaughter.

Witnesses V.G. Kritskiy, S.A. Markon, V.I. Likhchenkov and V.M. Tuneev said that in the SKC the distribution of food has a ritual character; all the food is dedicated to Krishna. However, the Krishnas don't tell people about that. At the same time, the respondent repeatedly underscored that the use of such food on Muslims, Orthodox and Jews contradicts their faith. By concealing the ritual character of the food SKC management violated the rights of the believers in the basic traditional confessions of our country. The witness for the plaintiff, S.A. Markon, formerly the director of the "Food for Life" program, was not able to give a satisfactory statement about the source of financing for "Food for Life" or about who had financial and bookkeeping responsibility there.

Violation of human rights in the SKC and commission of selfish and other crimes by the gurus is documented in the book my J. Haber and L. Gruson, "Monkey on a Stick."

Witnesses for the plaintiff prof. Eileen Barker (Great Britain) and prof. James Richardson (USA), as well as V.I. Likhchenkov and V.BN. Tuneev stated to the court that all the facts of criminal activity by the spiritual leaders of the SKC indicated in this book were authentic facts, although they were put down by journalists in literary form.

In particular, the book is taken as having a place in reality the fact of robbery by the SKC managers of jewelry stores and fencing stolen goods, fraud and extortion on a large scale measure, forgery of trademark and other activities violating patent law, smuggling various goods, trafficking in narcotics and weapons, beating, rape (including outrages upon children in especially cynical form) and murder.

Witnesses for the plaintiff Eileen Barker, James Richardson, as well as V.I. Likhchenkov and V.M. Tuneev did not deny the many hours that Krishnas spend collecting donations on the street or the fact of the application to SKC members of punishment, including physical, and also the availability in "Varnashram -- Manifest of Social Discretion" and other dogmatic sources of instruction on the permissibility and necessity of violence in the name of Krishna, instruction on the necessity of destroying families, removing material valuable, endeavors to seize power, etc.

Meanwhile witnesses Eileen Barker, James Richardson, V.G. Kritskiy, V.M. Tuneev and V.I. Likhchenkov indicated that this part of the "Manifest" was not used, i.e., its author Kharikesha Svami made a repudiation of this part of the "Manifest." However the official publication does not have the change at this time. Also no one repudiated similar assertions in other religious practice sources of the SKC.

Under these circumstances a basis for repudiation in court of A.L. Dvorkin's assertions about the SKC, operating abroad, does not exist, in as much as in essence his assertions are laid out in the book by J. Haber and L. Gruson, "Monkey on a Stick," "Varnashram -- Manifest of social discretion", as well as three basic religious practice sources of the Krishna members: "Bkhagavad-Gita as it is," "Shrimad-Bkhagavatam" and "Shri Yshopanishad," sections of which have been appended to the case (l.d. 191, t. 5; l.d. 32, t.6).

The court questioned in the capacity of witnesses Russian and foreign specialists in the area of jurisprudence and religious science: Dr.Leg.Sci Prof. Yu.A. Rosenbaum, cand.phil.sci S.I. Ivanenko, PhD prof. D.E. Furman, M.S. Shterin (Russia), prof. Eileen Barker (Great Britain), prof. James Richardson (USA) on the side of the plaintiff, and prof. Georgas Krippas (Greece), prof. Johannes Aargord (Denmark), Pastor Thomas Gandow (FRG), prof. Claire Champollion (France), cand.Ph.sci. E.N. Volkov (Russia), clergyman cand. arts Boris Mikhailov (Russia) on the side of the respondent. During questioning these witnesses expressed the available opposing views in religious science in relation to nontraditional religious organizations, like the SKC, the Scientology organization, Moon's "Unification Church," the "Jehovahs Witnesses," the "Bogorodichny Center," the "Family" ("Children of God"), Mormons, Vissarion's "Church of the Last Testament," "Aum Shinrikyo," "Beloe Bratstvo," the "Church of Christ" and others. Witnesses for the plaintiff did not deny that international nontraditional religious organizations, such as the SKC, the Scientology organization, Moon's "Unification Church," the "Family" and others having a criminal past and their activities contained the facts of human rights violations regarding their own members, as well as other persons, but stated that at the present time there is no danger, and besides that, that the nontraditional religious organizations created in Russia were independent legal persons and their development can be charitable. Meanwhile the witnesses recognize that the nontraditional religious organizations created in Russia have one and the same religious practices as the international organizations that founded them, and also have the same administrative centers abroad.

Witnesses for the respondent Thomas Gandow (FRG), Johannes Aargord (Denmark), Georgas Krippas (Greece), Claire Champollion (France), E.N. Volkov (Russia) and clergyman Boris Mikhailov (Russia) expressed concern about continuing human rights violations that occur in new religious organizations, including physical violence, exhausting labor, inadequate food and sleep, monstrous living conditions, etc.). About such violations not being isolated instances in connection with causing harm to personality, destroying families, with antisocial arrangements in sects to remove property and valuables from adepts, is evidenced by the decisions and verdicts of courts of various countries, including the US (for example, verdict of the Supreme Court of the State of California, Country of Los Angeles of October 16, 1994 and others), Canada (decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in the proceedings "Casey Hill versus Church of Scientology, 1995), France (for example, the decision of the Lyon Court of November 22, 1996 and others), Greece (for example, the decision of the Athens court of January 17, 1997 and others), Great Britain (for example, the decision of the London Supreme Court of October 19, 1995 and others), Italy (for example, the decision of the Milan Appellation Court of January 18, 1997 (misprint, decision was made November 5, 1993) and others), Japan (for example, the decision of the District Court of Fukuoka of May 27, 1994 and others), FRG (for example, the decision of the Federal Labor Court of the City of Hamburg of March 22, 1995 and others), Russia (decision of the Ostankinsky Intermunicipal Peoples Court of the City of Moscow of April 18, 1995), Ukraine (decision of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in November 1996) and also acts of Parliament and the Governments of France, Germany, Russia, Great Britain and the US. On this same item testifies the Resolution of the European Parliament of February 29, 1996.

Testimony from religious scientists -- witnesses for the respondent -- Thomas Gandow (FRG), Johannes Aargord (Denmark), Georgas Krippas (Greece), Claire Champollion (France) and E.N. Volkov (Russia) and clergyman Boris Mikhailov (Russia) is based on concrete facts and is corroborated by their documents.

This testimony, together with documents, is reliable proof that A.L. Dvorkin's assertions about "totalitarian sects" correspond to reality.

During the assessment the testimony of professor Eileen Barker (Great Britain), in being questioned at the behest of the plaintiffs, the court learned that in the period of study, in the capacity of expert on the activities of nontraditional religious organizations for the London School of Economics, where she teaches, she received monetary funds from Moon's "Unification Church" for training conferences and seminars, in connection with which the respondents expressed doubt as to the impartiality of the conclusions of this witness in evaluating "totalitarian sects." Besides that, the respondents referred to a press report from deputy of the British Parliament Alan Mill, which gave an extremely negative assessment of Eileen Barker's work in the capacity of director of the INFORM organization, involved with an extremely prosectarian position (l.d. 14-15, t. 6) and to a Protocol of a session of the Joint Parliament Commission, in which participated members of the House of Commons, as well as members of the House of Lords of February 6, 1992 (l.d. 16-24, t.6), in which a Memorandum was discussed written by a number of people that included Eileen Barker, about a secret project for the neutralization and destruction of the "anticult movement," in which the proposal was to obtain money from a number of new religious movements ("totalitarian sects") (l.d. 99-107, t.9).

Witness for the plaintiff V.M. Kalin, coordinator for the regional branch of the "Russian organization of Jehovahs Witnesses" (St. Petersburg, village of Sunny), testified that he did not know of the fact of human rights violations in this nontraditional organization, removing members' property, prohibition of blood transfusions leading to the death of adepts, ad also mandatory exhausting work of many hours to recruit new members; he considers A.L. Dvorkin's brochure disparaging to him. Therefore the court considers that his testimony represents the evidence of a person interested in the outcome of the case. Jehovahs Witnesses headquarters is located in Brooklyn (USA). There is where the publication of magazines "Watch Tower" and "Awake," established a common schedule of prayer assemblies, homilies and faith training for all members of this nontraditional religious organization throughout the world, including Russia. This testimony from V.M. Kalin about the absence of human rights violations is contradicted by the testimonies of witnesses prof. Georgas Krippas (Greece), as well as A.A. Losev, E.I. Ryabinkina and V.S. Burenkova (Russia), whose children and friends became victims of this sect. They cited actual supporting documents, including those issued from Jehovist sources, and even their official publications, facts about heavy unpaid labor to recruit new members, which is mandatory for members of "Jehovahs Witnesses (moreover, slave labor is practiced in the construction of the Administration Center of the organization in the village of "Sunny," St. Petersburg, about the influence on personality, about removal of property and money, about fatal cases from the prohibition of blood transfusions, and also about the antisocial and antigovernment character of this organization, subordinate only to the management in Brooklyn and extremely negatively talked about by all governments and religions of the world. Also the witnesses testified that the management of Jehovahs Witnesses assemble dossiers both on their own members and everyone with whom they come into contact. In the opinion, expressed by the witnesses, presented to the court for review, the magazines "Watch Tower" and "Awake" contain material that could qualify as instigating religious discord.

In the hearings persons were also questioned who are former members of the nontraditional religious organization "Bogorodichny Center": Ya.I. Lutsenko (Gromov) and T.V. Kharlamova, both were parents and relatives of people who went into the sect: N.K. Russkikh (daughter, a minor, was recruited into Moon's "Unification Church"), A.G. Aizenberg (daughter left for a sect "Zealots of True Piety", abandoning an eight-month old), E.I. Ryabinkina (son, daughter-in-law in "Jehovahs Witnesses" sect), Sh.G. Lutfullin (two daughters in "Society for Krishna Consciousness"), A.A. Losev (son in "Jehovahs Witnesses" sect), scholar F.P. Maslennikov (wife in "Bogorodichny Center"), M.V. Karanova (son in "Bogorodichny Center"), G.V. Shamova (niece of minor age in Scientology), I.M. Sysoeva (son in "Church of Christ"), V.V. Sventilova (daughter in "Bogorodichny Center"), V.A. Sukhotskaya (minor daughter in Vissarion's "Church of the Last Testament"), N.V. Babkin (son in Moon's "Unification Church"), S.N. Suslova (son in Moon's "Unification Church"), V.S. Burenkova (son in "Jehovahs Witnesses"), V.G. Portnov (daughter and son-in-law in "Society of Krishna Consciousness"), G.A. Kuznetsova (son in Moon's "Unification Church"), V.V. Orlova (two sons in "Church of Christ").

For instance, witness Ya.I. Lutsenko (Gromov) testified that in the period of his stay in the "Bogorodichny Center" he was subjected to punishment; for a minor offense he was forced to douse with cold water on the ice, deprived of sleep, forced to make thousands of bows to the ground, forced to cut contact with his own mother. He was forced to do heavy unpaid labor for many hours a day, during which all the standards of the KZOT and industrial safty were violated. As a result of his stay in the sect he became seriously ill, but no one gave him assistance. He testified about removal of possessions from him, about extortion of money and valuables from other members of the "Bogorodichny Center" and from individuals who did not belong to the sect.

Witness T.V. Kharlamova (Moscow), formerly one of the prominent members of the "Bogorodichny Center" ("Sister Xenia"), testified that before her eyes sect leaders committed serious crimes, such as: serious beatings (which she herself was subjected to), rape, torture by deprivation of sleep and food, outrages upon children (for example, before her eyes children were made to eat their own excrement). She also testified about the atmosphere of psychological violence that dominated the sect, constant foul language, people being forced into rituals to cut off relations from their own parents and destroying human dignity by actions and deeds. And she testified about heavy slave labor by members of the "Bogorodichny Center" and about removal from them of material valuables.

Witness Sh.G. Lutfullin (St. Petersburg) indicated that his children -- two twin daughters -- were drawn into the "Society for Krishna Consciousness" after which they quit school, left home and transferred to the sect all the valuables, money and clothing they had, including things that did not belong to them, drastically worsening their relations to their parents and worsening their health.

Witness A.G. Aizenberg (Moscow) indicated that his daughter, having been recruited into the "Zealots for True Piety" (one of whose leaders is plaintiff N.A. Balukova), left home, leaving her eight-month-old son to the mercy of fate. As a result of her going into the sect she developed mental illness and she was placed in a psychiatric clinic for treatment.

Witnesses E.I. Rybinkina (Moscow), A.A. Losev (Moscow Region) and V.S. Burenkova (Moscow) indicated that their children, who went into the "Jehovas Witnesses" sect, had drastically changed, they quit work and school, their health worsened, physical as well as mental, and they separated from their families. They suffer from exhausting work, undernourishment and lack of sleep. They have taken or tried to take all the material valuables they had at home.

Witness scholar V.P. Maslennikov (Moscow) indicated that his wife was recruited into the "Bogorodichny Center" sect. She brought to the sect all the material valuables at her disposal and left home. As V.P. Maslennikov indicated, even before she left, she engaged in self-torture per instructions from sect leaders: refusing food and sleep, making numerous bows to the ground, etc. Witness V.P. Maslennikov's family broke up.

Witness M.V. Karanova (Moscow Reg.) and V.V. Sventilova (Moscow) gave analogous testimony about their children, who went into the "Bogorodichny Center" sect. They also brought to it all the material valuables they had and all the earnings they had made, before they quit work, to engage in self-torture (including walking the streets in the winter with wet hair, walking in the winter barefoot, etc.) and had been gone from home for a long time. Both, by order of sect leaders, cut off connections with their parents and cursed them. When witness M.V. Kranova, who is an invalid, found her son in one of the "Bogorodichny Center" apartments, the sect guard took her by brute force and threw her out onto the street.

Witness I.M. Sysoeva (Moscow) and V.V. Orlov Moscow), gave testimony about the same changes that had come over their children, when they became members of the "Church of Christ." They brought to the sect all the material valuables they had at home and all the earnings they had saved before they quit work. They also experienced significant personality changes, their psyche injured. Both witnesses indicated that in the night on April 27, 1997 (the day of the Orthodox Easter), one of the members of the "Church of Christ," Leonid Akhintin, died under mysterious circumstances. They both expressed the conviction that the young man, whom they knew personally, committed suicide from not being able to withstand the heavy psychological pressure inside the sect.

Witness V.A. Sukhotskaya (Moscow) indicated that her daughter became a member of Vissarion's "Church of the Last Testament." The witness related the terrible conditions that reigned in the crowded living conditions of the Vissarionites in Krasnodar Krai, about the strict nonprotein diet prescribed for them, refusal of medical aid and slave labor in the severe Siberian weather conditions. The witness indicated that many members of the sect gave their boss Vissarion (S.A. Torop) significant valuables, including their apartments, automobiles and life savings, which goes to assure a magnificent lifestyle for Vissarion and a close circle of friends. The witness submitted documents to the court that corroborated her testimony. Witness V.A. Sukhotskaya submitted to the court documents about several deaths occurring among the adepts of the sect from exhaustion and from failure to render medical assistance. The witness expressed apprehension that with the great isolation of sect members from society was a greater danger of a tragic outcome, including mass suicide.

Witness G.V. Shamova (Moscow) gave testimony about her minor age niece who had been recruited into the Scientology sect. According to her testimony, the minor age niece brought to the sect all the money she had at home, extorted additional monetary sums from the parents for transfer to the sect, threatened suicide and threatened physical reprisal (up to and including murder) of her mother, if she got in her way to Scientology. The entire time the girl was in the sect she was engaged there in hard physical labor for a nominal salary.

All the witnesses for the plaintiff, whose loved ones had become victims of "totalitarian sects" asserted that their loved ones had completely lost personal freedom and individuality. These witnesses felt that their loved ones were "programmed" or "zombified." They all refused any family obligations, including emergency aid for sick family members. They all turned out to be incapable of accepting other opinions and reacted extremely aggressively to any criticism directed at their sects. Handed the choices of: family, parents, children, friends, work, government, civil and human obligations or the sect, they unequivocally chose the sect. All the witnesses were of the opinion that their loved ones went into the sect not voluntarily, but under the influence of fraud, and stayed in the sect because of the pressure put upon them from the side of sect management. This pressure can be understood as psychological, as well as physical and deprives them of the right of choice.

Under these circumstances the court considers it established that A.L. Dvorkin's information on "totalitarian sects" (nontraditional religious organizations) in the brochure "Ten Questions for Importunate Strangers, or Aid for those who would not want to be recruited," which the plaintiffs contest, correspond to reality, and therefore are not subject to refutation.

The guidelines are art. 203, 193-197 GPK RF, art 151, 152 GK RF, Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Supreme Court of August 18, 1992 (with the revision of April 20, 1995) and art. 14, item 17, art. 19, 21, 23, and 18, items 1,2 and 4 of art. 29 of the RF Constitution (Basic Law).

The court decided: In the Lawsuit of the Public Committee for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience, Lev Semenovich Levinson, Mikhail Semenovich Osadchev and Nataliya Aleksandrovna against Aleksandr Leonidovich Dvorkin, the Department of Religious Education and Catechization of the Moscow Patriarchy about the defense of honor, dignity and business reputation, the refutation of disparaging information is refused.

The decision may be appealed in Moscow court within ten days.

Judges (signed)