1. Politics & Religion in BelgiumHow an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn Issue I

2. Table of contentsSummarypage 3Belgian Constitution, 1831 page 5Coincidence? Synchronicity? Coordinated effort?page 6The growth of the sect listpage 9How the sect list has been used in Belgium page 11(and France)What were the methods used by the Parliamentary page 13Inquiry and Working Group?A democratic and transparent process? page 15Hardly so - a rather embarassing chapterAdvice of CIAOSN on FECRIS page 17Incoherence, inconsistency and discriminationpage 19They have said page 20This situation cost the CIAOSN and the Belgian State page 23several convictionsWhen real social problems will be tackled effectively? page 262 3. How an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn in Belgium SummaryO n 28 March 1996 an inquiry commission was created to look into the possibledangers of sects in Belgium, issuing its 670-page report on 28 April 1997.The report included as an annex an alphabetical list of 189 groups, including commentary,which has become a de facto sect list.The Parliament refused to adopt the report as such and only voted to accept theconclusions and recommendations (19 pages). Despite this disavowal, the governmentfound it appropriate to publish the whole report, including the controversial list.Following this report, in 1998, a Federal Observatory on Sects, formally knownas the Center for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations(CIAOSN) was created under the authority of the Ministry of Justice.The Observatory, far from being the independent and impartial body that the lawmandates, is a primary source of misinformation and intolerance towards religiousminorities in Belgium.On 21 April 2004 a Parliamentary Working Group on Sects was formed to determinethe extent that the 1997 Parliamentary inquiry commissions recommendations onsects had been implemented. It presented its report to the Parliament, which adoptedthe recommendations in its Plenary Session on 30 March 2006.The Working Group repeated, even worsened, the serious methodological errorscontained in the 1997 Report, so compounding the already existing problem.The individuals who appeared before the Working Group consisted exclusively ofBelgian government intelligence, law enforcement and sect observatory officials.No religious experts, human rights experts nor sociologists were invited to theWorking Group hearings. No religious leaders, representatives of interfaith groups,nor representatives of the religious communities derogatorily designated as sectswere invited. No Working Group hearings were open to the public, allowing forpublic debate and scrutiny and for government transparency regarding its policy ofminority religious freedom and tolerance. Instead, the hearings were conducted behindclosed doors.Twelve years after the establishment of the Observatory on Sects, it is time to drawsome conclusions and raise questions about the results of what is widely considered tobe, at least beyond the Belgian borders, an out of proportion and discriminatory seriesof measures that target religious organizations, violating international human rightstreaties ratified by Belgium.Meanwhile, serious problems affecting Belgian youth and society, such as drug abuse,juvenile unemployment, suicide and crime rates, have not been the subject of anyparliamentary commission or working group3 4. The Congress column in Brussels 4 5. How an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn in Belgium Belgian Constitution, 1831Article 11 E njoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized for Belgians should be ensured without discrimination. To this end, laws anddecrees guarantee notably the rights and freedoms of ideological andphilosophical minorities. Article 19 Freedom of worship, public practice of the latter, as well as freedom to demonstrate ones opinions on all matters, are guaranteed, exceptfor the repression of offences committed when using this freedom.Reading the Constitution, one might think that Freedom of Religion is well protected in Belgium. However, since the end of the 1990s religious minorities,often labeled as cults and sects, are the victims of various forms of discrimination.At the end of the 1990s the European Union, the Council of Europe and a number ofmember states looked into the issue of religious minorities, or sects.The position of eleven member states of the European Union was that sects do notharm the individual, the family, society or their democratic institutions to the point ofnecessitating the need to create new institutions or organizations to combat them, andthat in any case existing judicial systems could handle potential abuses.Unfortunately, four EU member states decided to take a different course of action:two German-speaking countries (Austria and Germany), a French-speaking country(France), and a linguistically and culturally mixed country (Belgium).5 6. Coincidence?Synchronicity?Coordinated effort?6 7. How an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn in BelgiumA n old Belgian saying goes When it rains in Paris, raindrops fall in Brussels. Thisis certainly applicable to a sudden interest of the governmental and legislativeinstitutions, both in France and Belgium, to investigate the activities of religiousminorities, cults and sects labeled as dangerous: FranceBelgiumParliamentary Commission 1995 1996Observatory1996 1998However,Belgium outperformed France:The Parliamentary Inquiry and Working Group met seventy-four times (74) inBrussels, the French inquiry ran for 20 meetings.Belgium also saw bigger:France issued a list of 173 organizations to be watched, but:Belgium initially came up with a synoptic table of 189organizations that became a de facto black list, despiteunofficial denials and attempts to minimize its impact.France retracted its list...*Belgiums list is still growing...* Journal Officiel de la Rpublique Franaise n126, circular of 27 May 2005 relative to the fight againstsectarian abuses. 7 8. You dont haveanything but sectshere, sects, sects...Julia Nyssens, head of ADIF (Association de Dfense de lIndividuet de la Famille) and witness during the parliamentary commission,RTL-TVI, 18 September 20038 9. How an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn in BelgiumT he original synoptic table which was made public when attached to theParliamentary Report of 1996, grew from 189 entries to a secret list of 700+groups in 2006, according to a report of the CIAOSN.What about today? Today even the number of entries on the list is not public,effectively creating a Black List, an intolerable discrimination against religiousminorities.The growth of the sect list900 ?597 700+ 189 1997 2006 2010 9 10. 10 11. How an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn in BelgiumHow the sect list has been used in Belgium(and France)Before being member of the Observatory, I was parliamentary assistant for Mr. Duquesneduring the inquiry commission. As such, I contributed to establishing what was called thesynoptic table. Henri de Cordes, president of the CIAOSN, proceedings of the first Belgiancolloquium of help to sect victims, 30 October 1999The media also play a role: they should inform the public, especially the youngsters. Hilde Vautmans, member of the Working Group on Sects, during the presentation of its report, 30 March 2006Following publication of the parliamentary reports and the lists of sects, many cases of intolerance and discrimination in the public and private sectors werereported in France and in Belgium. Complaints from French and Belgian individualsbelonging to the blacklisted groups have steadily increased and include loss of jobsor promotions, dismissals, libel, slander, victimization in the neighborhood, at theworkplace and at school, damage to individuals reputation, loss of visitation rights orchild custody in divorce settlements, inability to rent facilities for religious ceremoniesor for meetings, unilateral and unfounded closure of bank accounts of sects or ofindividuals affiliated with them, humanitarian agencies refusal to accept donationsfrom sects, denial of access to public display boards and police surveillance.*Apparently this is the expected result of theinformative role to be played by the mediaafter they have been fed with the black listof religious organizations in Belgium.* Human Rights Without Frontiers, Religious freedom, intolerance, discrimination in the EuropeanUnion, Belgium 2002 - 2003.11 12. Sociologists: 0Religious experts: 0 Anti-sect groups: 6 12 13. How an escalating social issue took a dangerous turn in Belgium What were the methods used by theParliamentary Inquiry and Working Group?One could reasonably think that the members of these two undertakings would be chosen from legislators andeminent religious and sociological experts.But were they?ExpertsParliamentary InquiryWorking groupGovernment33Magistracy, Police Intelligence,Administration 10 10Academics 60Media 60Anti-sect groups60Members of religiousorganizations 80Sociologists00Religious experts 00A ll the other witnesses wereheard behind closed doors,sometimes by only a few membersrefute their potentially sectariancharacter, but they were notinformed of the accusations raisedof the commission and without the against them during the public andothers knowledge. The commission non-public hearings. They couldsent a letter to seventy-one of the therefore not defend themselves.associations mentioned by various The other 118 movements that werestate agencies as suspected of beinglisted did not get such an invitationharmful to society or the individual. and were consequently not able toThe letter asked the groups topresent a summary of their activitiesdescribe their objectives and toor to contest any accusations.13 14. ~~~o," O~""v~IrR" r.~/2 S ""I;to!. J9">t:1.J9,IJ997O"VNE. ZI7-rING 19