• Hare Krishna treated as a harmful sectarian organization - (08.01.2002)

Belgiums new anti-discrimination law

In December 2002, Belgium's Senate finally adopted a new anti-discrimination law expanding on the grounds of discrimination to include, among others, religious or philosophical beliefs. With this new law, the mandate of the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Fight against Racism has broadened to deal with all forms of discrimination on grounds of race, colour, national or ethnic background, gender, handicap, state of health, age, religious or philosophical beliefs.

The Centre for Equal Opportunities (13.12.2002)/ HRWF International Secretariat (09.01.2003) - Website: www.hrwf.net - Email: info@hrwf.net - The Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities and Fight against Racism has welcomed the Senate's decision to finally adopt the anti-discrimination law on 12 December.

This law deals with a large number of concrete and legitimate issues:-

• 1. Protection against discrimination on the basis of various personal characteristics: this law answers the legitimate need not only for legal protection against racial discrimination, but also against discrimination based on sexual orientation, handicap, state of health, religious or philosophical beliefs and age.
• 2. As for racial discrimination, this law supplements legislation passed in 1981. Notably quoted in the Centres annual reports, these shortcomings were particularly serious in the field of discrimination on the employment market. The need to remedy this situation had recently been further highlighted these last few weeks.

The problems were the following:

• It was difficult to prove racist intention (as the Belgian anti-racist law is a criminal law, intention must be proved) ;
• As criminal proceedings are long and difficult, victims of discrimination were often discouraged from taking the matter to court ;
• Principles of criminal law make the victim responsible to provide proof of discrimination, whereas most of the elements were at the hands of the discriminating person or organisation.

The new law provides the following solutions:

• The creation of a wide definition of discrimination, describing an act of discrimination, whether intentional or not. This is a new civil approach, tackling discrimination as a situation of fact that must be rectified rather than a crime ;
• The shifting of the responsibility of proving the case : if the victim presents a case which establishes a suggestion of discrimination, it is up to the defendant to prove non-discrimination ;
• The setting up of a rapid civil procedure with the sole aim to halt discrimination as rapidly as possibly.

The aforementioned elements are, among others, those stipulated by European directives against discrimination. These directives have now been transposed into Belgian law by this new legislation. These elements are just as valuable in dealing with racism as with the other forms of discrimination covered by this law.

It should also be noted that the new law introduces a concept called abject motives. This would mean that for a number of offences (ie murder, bodily harm, harassment, refusal to help a person in danger, destruction of property, etc), sentences could be doubled if the judicial enquiry was able to prove that one of the motives for the crime was hatred, contempt or hostility towards someone on the basis of their supposed race, colour, class, national or ethnic background, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, birthplace, age, financial situation, religious or philosophical beliefs, current or future state of health, a handicap or a physical characteristic. The anti-discrimination law is also a firm reply from our society to the phenomenon of hate-driven crimes against certain groups of individuals or communities.

With this new law, the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Fight against Racism now has the jurisdiction to deal with the motives of discrimination covered by the legislation (with the exception of cases of sexual discrimination). The Centre will act with the same determination as in the past to ensure this legislation and the reasoning behind it is respected.

Back to the Table of Contents

Turbulent relations between the State and Islam

A controversial experiment

A report to the government on the functioning of the Executive of Muslims in Belgium

Willy Fautr, Human Rights Without Frontiers

Monsieur Philippe Moureaux (French-speaking Socialist Party) and Ms Meryem Ka?ar (Flemish Green Agalev Party), the two senators charged by the government to report on the functioning of the Executive of Muslims in Belgium have been unable to reach an agreement on the joint proposals aimed at a more effective organisation of Muslim worship in Belgium. The restricted council of ministers has decided to closely examine Phillippe Moureauxs report, which recommends re-electing nearly half of the members of the Executive.

HRWF (31.10.2002)/ Website http://www.hrwf.net - Email info@hrwf.net - On the 13th December 1998, Belgian Muslims were invited to elect a constituent assembly (68 elected and co-opted members), from which would emerge a 16-member Executive, the official interlocutor with the Belgian state. These elections were held at the Belgian states request and co-organised by a state-funded organisation, the Centre for Equal Opportunities and the Muslim representative body of the time. The elections were poorly supported, only 40,000 out of 70,000 registered electors actually turned up to vote, despite the fact that the Muslim community in Belgium numbers around 350,000, 3.5% of the total population. The two most represented foreign national groups by far are Moroccan (around 150,000) and Turkish (around 85,000).

A royal decree was published on the 25th May 1999 which recognised the Executive as ? the interlocutor with the authorities, both on a federal level to deal with the administrative management of religions (nominations of imams and chaplains, management of local communities) as well as at the level of the federated entities, notably with regard to education (programmes, inspections and appointing of religious teachers) ?.

Interferences of the Belgian state with internal affairs of Islam

This seemingly attractive shop front unfortunately hides a less than rosy interior. From the outset of the process, the Belgian state has interfered in the democratic elections that it set up with the intention of monitoring an Executive which would represent Muslim diversity, but also be ? acceptable ?, i.e. docile. Therefore the Minister of Justice rejected more than half of the elected Executive members after a secret and irrevocable ? screening ? process by state security.

Once in place, the Executive began to function under the control of its assembly, but the Belgian state, suspecting some of the elected assembly members to be Islamic fundamentalists, feared losing control of the Executive to their advantage. When the Executive was led to replace the positions that had become vacant, it supremely designated the new members together with its assembly. There was an immediate reaction from the State to this new Executive : it was out of the question that replacements take their positions before being ? screened ? and without the state agreement for each of the new members. Hence the Executive was beset by new tensions between the constituent assembly and the State, and there was general resentment because Islam is the only religion in Belgium to pay the price of discrimination and state interference. Should the Executive obediently throw in its hand to the State and lose the confidence of the assembly (and the Muslim community), or should it only heed the voices of the elected members, entering into a head-on collision with the State?

The point of view of the Moureaux Report on the Executive crisis

? I do not wish to analyse the rather deceptive history of the loss of trust at the heart of the Executive. () I restrict myself to making the following report :

a) The Executive no longer has the assemblys confidence. () This distrust has in all likelihood excessively crystallized a majority, which on this occasion, found a strong method to question the ? screening ? process, instituted at the creation of the Executive. Even so, this distrust exists, it still remains at least in part and it explains the internal jolts of the Executive. In fact, the ones who had been the object of this distrust, sometimes maladroitly encouraged by certain official representatives, are now using the Executive crisis to definitively put the assembly out of play.

b) The functioning of the Executive has been imperfect : the President of the Executive, a person of calibre who represents the Muslim community to outsiders with talent, has not always ? federated ? with sufficient force the different members who felt themselves to be orphans. Beyond animosities between individuals, these are irrelevant and I wish to pass over them as far as possible, I remark between the members of the Executive a lack of coherence : several members are not able to transcend their differences of origin whilst still respecting certain characteristics that are part of an inescapable cultural substratum. Islam is both one and at the same time very diverse in its expression. ?

In discussions with various representatives of the Muslim community, senator Moureaux notes two contradictory suggestions to end the crisis:

1. Dissolution of the current Executive and the election of a new Executive by an assembly which would control it closely.

2. Putting the assembly definitively out of play to stabilise the Executive.

Towards a "Belgian" compromise

Phillippe Moureaux presented his own recommendations under the title ? A Reasonable Compromise ?.

The suggested solution will of course not give full satisfaction to any one individual, and this solution is set out in a strictly pragmatic manner to avoid any juridical character.

a) A partially renewed Executive : It is not difficult to see that the compromise must lie mid-way between a complete re-election of the Executive and the status quo. It should not be impossible to obtain the resignation of a part of this Executive in the measure that the current members made a solemn agreement to withdraw if they no longer had the confidence of the constituent assembly. Negotiations could be quickly conducted that would allow to prepare the re-election of half of the Executive. At the conclusion of such negotiations, the representatives of the assembly should agree to limit their proposals to re-elect the Executive to half of the members.

b) A rehabilitated but more effectively monitored assembly et the institutional level : The suggestion is to effectively entrust an important role to the assembly, organising it in the following way to avoid deviances such as those mentioned at the beginning of this report :

- The assembly will meet for one annual session lasting a maximum of 15 days, to hear a communication by the Executive and to take position, if need be, on the general principles which should govern the Executives policy with regard to the representation of Islam.

- The assembly will be able to propose a vote of no confidence with regard to the Executive at the annual general meeting. This motion must be constructive (beyond the vote of no confidence which must be clarified, assembly members who support this motion must submit candidates for a new Executive). If this motion receives a qualified majority to be determined, it will be put into immediate effect. If this qualified majority is not reached, the vote will be postponed until the next session.

c) A better controlled ? screening ? process : the partial re-election of the Executive inevitably poses the political authorities the problem of ? screening ? the candidates. Firmly anchored in some minds is the fear that representatives of extremist groups, to avoid saying terrorists, might appear. Clearly it would appear quite unbelievable for one religion to be treated any differently to another as far as this issue is concerned. However, a suggestion of this type lies uniquely within a concern for pragmatism.

A primary principle must firstly be clearly asserted in this matter : any negative opinions concerning an individual should be expressed at the time that he submits his candidature and not after his election.

Finally, if the political authority wishes to consult the security services at its disposition, the simple confidential opinion of this body cannot justify a censure.

The contested individual must clearly be able to benefit from the opportunity of appealing to an independent commission, which has the confidence of both the authorities and the Muslim community. After being duly informed of the grievances held by the political authorities, this commission will decide independently as to whether these are relevant or not.

The installation of a procedure such as described above appears to me to be indispensable if we want to both maintain a certain level of monitoring and avoid the justified criticism of the total arbitrariness which drives a significant part of the Muslim community. ?

Philippe Moureaux concludes : ?The proposed solutions are transitory. It is clear to me that, in the future, the Muslim community should be treated on a completely equal footing in relation to other recognised religions ?.

These are the proposals made by the Moureaux Report. It remains to be seen what the Muslim community and its representatives will make of them if they are adopted, as they stand or in an amended form, by the government.

As a reminder, the Belgian State recognises and finances Catholicism, Protestantism, Anglicanism, Orthodoxy, Judaism, Islam and secularism.

Back to the Table of Contents

International Religious Freedom Report 2002

State Department (07.10.2002) - The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice; however, the Government took action against groups that it considers "harmful sects."

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report, and government policy continued to contribute to the generally free practice of religion.

There are generally amicable relations among different religious groups in society; however, several religious groups complain of discrimination, particularly groups that have not been accorded official "recognized" status by the Government, and those associated primarily with immigrant communities.

The U.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

Section I. Religious Demography

The country has a total area of 12,566 square miles and its population is approximately 10.3 million.

The population is predominantly Roman Catholic. Approximately 75 percent of the population nominally belongs to the Catholic Church. The Muslim population numbers approximately 350,000, approximately 90 percent of whom are Sunni. Protestants number between 90,000 and 100,000. The Greek and Russian Orthodox churches have approximately 100,000 adherents. The Jewish population is estimated at 40,000, and the Anglican Church has approximately 21,000 members. The largest nonrecognized religions are Jehovah's Witnesses, with approximately 27,000 baptized members, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), with approximately 3,000 members. According to the Government, nonconfessional philosophical organizations (or "laics") have 350,000 members; however, the laics claim 1.5 million members. Unofficial estimates indicate that approximately 10 percent of the population does not identify with any religion.

According to a 1999 survey by an independent academic group, only 11.2 percent of the population attend weekly religious services. However, religion still does play a role in major life events--65 percent of the children born in the country are baptized; 49.2 percent of couples opt for a religious marriage; and 76.6 percent of funerals include religious services.

Section II. Status of Religious Freedom

Legal/Policy Framework

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice.

The Government accords "recognized" status to Roman Catholicism, Protestantism (including evangelicals), Judaism, Anglicanism, Islam, and Orthodox Christianity (Greek and Russian). These religions receive subsidies from government revenues. The Government also supports the freedom to participate in laic organizations. These secular humanist groups serve as a seventh recognized "religion" and their organizing body, the Central Council of Non-Religious Philosophical Communities of Belgium, receives funds and benefits similar to those of the six other recognized religions.

By law each recognized religion has the right to provide teachers at government expense for religious instruction in schools. The Government also pays the salaries, retirement, and lodging costs of ministers and subsidizes the construction and renovation of church buildings for recognized religions. The ecclesiastical administrations of recognized religions have legal rights and obligations, and the municipality in which they are located must pay any debts that they incur. Some subsidies are the responsibility of the federal government while the regional and municipal governments pay others. According to an independent academic review, government at all levels spent $523 million (23 billion Belgian francs) on subsidies for recognized religions in 2000. Of that amount, 79.2 percent went to the Catholic Church, 13 percent to secular humanist groups, 3.5 percent to Muslims, 3.2 percent to Protestants, 0.6 percent to Jews, 0.4 percent to Orthodox Christians, and 0.1 percent to Anglicans. During 2001, the Muslim Executive Council applied for the first time for subsidies, and the Government announced that in 2002 it would recognize 75 mosques and pay salaries to imams assigned to these mosques. The Council, which is recognized by the Government, received funding; however, specific mosques and religious schools, which have not yet been proposed by the Council and thus are not recognized by the Government, received no funding. Taxpayers who object to contributing to these subsidies may initiate legal proceedings to challenge their contributions.

The Government applies the following five criteria in deciding whether or not to grant recognition to a religious group: 1) the religion must have a structure or hierarchy; 2) the group must have a sufficient number of members; 3) the religion must have existed in the country for a long period of time; 4) it must offer a social value to the public; and 5) the religion must abide by the laws of the State and respect public order. The five criteria are not listed in decrees or laws. The law does not define "sufficient," "a long period of time," or "social value." A religious group seeking official recognition applies to the Ministry of Justice, which then conducts a thorough review before recommending approval or rejection. Final approval of recognized status is the sole responsibility of the Parliament; however, the Parliament generally accepts the decision of the Ministry of Justice. A group whose application is refused by the Ministry of Justice may appeal the decision to the Council of State.

The lack of recognized status does not prevent religious groups from practicing their faith freely and openly. Nonrecognized groups do not qualify for government subsidies; however, they may qualify for tax-exempt status as nonprofit organizations.

Restrictions on Religious Freedom

In response to a number of highly publicized mass suicides and murders in France, Switzerland, and Canada by members of the Solar Temple cult (including some Belgian citizens who were leaders and members) in the mid-1990s, the Parliament in 1996 established a special Commission to examine the potential dangers that sects may represent to society, especially children, and to recommend policies to deal with those dangers. The Commission's 1997 report divided sects into two broadly defined categories. The Commission considered as the first category of sects (defined as "organized groups of individuals espousing the same doctrine with a religion") to be respectable and to reflect the normal exercise of freedom of religion and assembly provided for by fundamental rights. The second category, "harmful sectarian organizations," are defined as groups having or claiming to have a philosophical or religious purpose whose organization or practice involves illegal or injurious activities, harms individuals or society, or impairs human dignity. Attached to the report was a list of 189 sectarian organizations that were mentioned during testimony before the Commission (including groups such as Jehovah's Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Church of Scientology, and the Young Women's Christian Association). Although the introduction to the list clearly stated that there was no intent to characterize any of the groups as "dangerous," the list quickly became known in the press and to the public as the "dangerous sects" list. The Parliament eventually adopted several of the report's recommendations but never adopted the list itself.

Some religious groups included in the 1997 parliamentary list continue to complain that their inclusion has resulted in discriminatory action against them. For example, in November 2001, the Church of Scientology was informed on the morning of a scheduled press conference that it could not use the International Press Center to announce its suit against the Commission's 1997 sect list. A representative of the Center reportedly cited the presence of the Church of Scientology on the list as a reason for the cancellation. However, several months later, the Center reviewed the refusal and decided that in the future the Church of Scientology could use the facilities. In October 2001, a non-profit bank, Fonds du Logement des Familles Nombreuses de Wallonie, rejected an application for a low-interest, government-subsidized home loan from a devotee of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), commonly known as the Hare Krishna group. The bank's rejection letter cited ISKCON's financial interest as the seller of the home, ISKCON's inclusion on the parliamentary Commission's sect list, and a fear of financing the ISKCON movement as reasons for the loan refusal. In November 2001, according to press reports the City of Liege canceled an ISKCON permit to distribute free vegetarian food under the "Hare Krishna Food for Life" program, a weekly practice begun in 1997. The City reportedly cited disturbance of public order as the basis for the withdrawal of the permit.

Some courts in the Flanders region continued to stipulate, in the context of child custody proceedings and as a condition of granting visitation rights, that a noncustodial parent who is a member of Jehovahs Witnesses may not expose his or her children to the teachings or lifestyle of that religious group during visits. These courts have claimed that such exposure would be harmful to the child; however, other courts have not imposed this restriction.

One of the primary recommendations of the 1997 parliamentary report was the creation of a government-sponsored Center for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations. The Center was open to the public in July 2000. The Center collects publicly available information on a wide range of religious and philosophical groups and provides information and advice to the public upon request regarding the legal rights of freedom of association, privacy, and freedom of religion. The Center's library is open to the public and contains information on religion in general as well as on specific religious groups including information provided by various groups. The Center is authorized to share with the public any information it collects on religious sects; however, it is not authorized to provide assessments of individual sectarian organizations to the general public and despite its name, the regulations prohibit it from categorizing any particular group as harmful.

The law creating the Center stipulates that the harmful nature of a sectarian group is to be evaluated in reference to principles contained in the Constitution, orders, laws, decrees, and in international human rights instruments ratified by the Government. The Center is required by law to publish a report on its activities every 2 years. In December 2002, the Center released its first report, covering the period from 1999 to 2000. The report reviewed the laws creating the Center, meetings in which the Center participated, and its projects. The report identified two responses by the Center to specific government requests: a "favorable" opinion of the European Center for Research and Information on Sectarianism in response to an inquiry from the Foreign Ministry and a "favorable" opinion of the Mormon Church in response to an inquiry from the Ministry of the Interior. The report also recommended that the Ministry of Justice draft a law to prohibit the abuse of a situation of "weakness."

An interagency coordination group designed to work in conjunction with the Center to coordinate government policy meets quarterly to exchange information on sect activities. The Government also has designated a national magistrate and 1 magistrate in each of the 27 judicial districts to monitor cases involving sects.

The 1997 parliamentary report also recommended that the country's municipal governments sponsor information campaigns to educate the public, especially children, about the phenomenon of harmful sects. A 1998 law formally charges the country's State Security with the duty of monitoring harmful sectarian organizations as potential threats to the internal security of the country. This law uses the same language as the Parliamentary Commission's report and defines "harmful sectarian organizations" as any religious or philosophical group that, through its organization or practices, engages in activities that are illegal, injurious, or harmful to individuals or society. A subgroup of law enforcement officials meets bi-monthly to exchange information on sect activities. Most law enforcement agencies have an official specifically assigned to handle sect issues.

The Government permits religious instruction in public schools; however, students are not required to attend religion classes. Public school religion teachers are nominated by a committee from their religious group and appointed by the Minister of Education. All public schools have a teacher for each of the six recognized religions. A seventh choice, a nonconfessional course, is available if the child does not wish a religious course. Private Catholic schools receive government subsidies for working expenses and teacher salaries.

In February 2001 the Church of Scientology took legal action to force the return of documents including parishioners' confidential spiritual counseling folders seized in a 1999 police raid of church facilities and the homes and businesses of approximately 20 members. No arrests were made or charges filed against church members as a result of the original raid. The Church of Scientology also filed a complaint asserting that the Prosecutor's Office provided prejudicial statements to the press in violation of the country's secrecy laws regarding investigations. A second, smaller raid on the Church of Scientologys Brussels headquarters took place on February 8, 2001 and additional documents were seized. Most of the seized computer equipment was returned to the Church; however, the investigating magistrate continued to hold the documents from both raids at the end of the period covered by this report. On March 6, 2001, the Church filed a complaint against the Government with the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Religious Intolerance. On January 30, 2002, the Brussels Appellate Court ruled that the personal files were held lawfully by the investigating magistrate, that the Church compiled and maintained personal information in violation of privacy laws, and that the court was under no obligation to return the files.

After having suspended issuances from April to July 2000, the Government again suspended the issuance of visas to Mormon missionaries in November 2001. Although similar visas had been processed for decades without problems, the Government attributed the change in policy to the Foreign Worker's Act of 1999 requirement that religious workers obtain work permits before applying for a visa to enter the country for religious work. Mormon missionaries were told that they should reapply for visas after obtaining the appropriate work permits. However, since Mormon missionaries are strictly volunteers who pay their own way and receive no salary or subsidy from the Church, they do not qualify for the required work permit. Negotiations between representatives of the Mormons and the Ministry of Interior, facilitated by the U.S. Embassy, led to a resumption of the issuance of visas in July 2000 under special temporary procedures. The Government halted the issuance of visas to Mormon missionaries under these temporary procedures in November 2001. After further meetings with Embassy and Mormon Church representatives, in June 2002, the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs agreed to exempt volunteer Mormon missionaries from the certificate requirement and to process all 85 pending visa applications.

In February 2002, police detained five American volunteer workers at an Assemblies of God school and media center for working without employment permits; four were deported shortly thereafter. The law requires employment permits, even for volunteers. However, since Assemblies of God volunteers pay their own way and receive no salary they do not qualify for the required work permit. The church leaders closed the school for the spring term in the wake of the deportations. The Assemblies of God is a member of the Evangelical Synod which in turn is represented on the officially recognized Protestant Synod. The Assemblies of God also is included on the parliamentary Commission's 1997 sect list. At the end of the period covered by this report, church officials continued to work with the Government to satisfy employment and immigration law requirements.

There were no reports of religious prisoners or detainees.

Forced Religious Conversion

There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of minor U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States, or of the refusal to allow such citizens to be returned to the United States.

Section III. Societal Attitudes

There are generally amicable relations among different religious groups in society; however, several religious groups complain of discrimination, particularly groups which have not been accorded official "recognized" status by the Government and those associated primarily with immigrant communities.

In the spring of 2002, several anti-Semitic incidents directed at Jewish communities occurred, including a pro-Palestinian riot in Antwerp in April and firebombings of synagogues in Brussels and Antwerp. Unknown persons fired automatic gunfire at a synagogue in Charleroi. Government officials strongly criticized the attacks on the Jewish community and increased security around synagogues and Jewish community buildings.

The President of the Muslim Executive Council reported increased anti-Islamic sentiment after the Fall of 2001. For example, a clearly deranged man attacked his Muslim neighbors in Brussels before committing suicide.

The President of the Muslim Executive Council reported that women and girls wearing traditional dress or headscarves in some cases face discrimination in private employment even though the law does not prohibit such dress. In January 2001, the Court of Cassation, the nation's highest court, ruled that municipal authorities could not deny an identification card to a woman wearing a headscarf.

At the national level, there is an annual general assembly of the National Ecumenical Commission to discuss various religious themes. The Catholic Church sponsors working groups at the national level to maintain dialog and promote tolerance among all religious groups. At the local level, every Catholic diocese has established Commissions for interfaith dialog.

Section IV. U.S. Government Policy

The U.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

U.S. Embassy representatives discussed the issue of religious freedom throughout the period covered by this report with officials from the Ministries of Justice, Foreign Affairs, and Interior, as well as with Members of Parliament. Embassy officials also expressed concern regarding anti-Semitic incidents. There is an ongoing dialog between the Embassy and the Ministry of Justice at the cabinet level regarding the implementation of recommendations of the 1997 parliamentary report on sectarian organizations. Embassy officials also met regularly with the Director of the Center for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations and closely monitored the Center's activities. Embassy officials continued to monitor the Government's progress toward implementing a permanent solution to the Mormon visa problem and the issuance of work permits for volunteer religious workers.

Embassy officials met with representatives of both recognized and nonrecognized religions that reported some form of discrimination during the period covered by this report.

Released on October 7, 2002

(*) The International Religious Freedom Report for 2002 is submitted to the Congress by the Department of State in compliance with Section 102(b) of the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) of 1998. The law provides that the Secretary of State shall transmit to Congress by September 1 of each year, or the first day thereafter on which the appropriate House of Congress is in session," an Annual Report on International Religious Freedom supplementing the most recent Human Rights Reports by providing additional detailed information with respect to matters involving international religious freedom." This Annual Report includes 192 country chapters on the status of religious freedom worldwide.

Back to the Table of Contents

Anti-Semitism in Belgium 2002

Colleen Chen, for Human Rights Without Frontiers

Belgium, alongside France and Germany, was the one of the focal points in Europe for a sharp escalation of anti-Semitism in 2002. Attacks, both verbal and physical, occurred mostly in Brussels and Antwerp, especially in locations with large concentrations of Arab/Muslim and Jewish populations. This trend of a marked increase in attacks began with the second intifadeh of October 2000, which has been used as justification for anti-Jewish activity by local Muslims, and was stimulated anew by the events of 9/11 and the reactions that have followed.

General societal and political atmosphere

In 2002, anti-Semitism was expressed mostly in isolated and spontaneous acts, propagated mainly by extreme right political parties and movements or groups of young Arab-Muslim immigrants who are often in contact with fundamentalist political-religious movements. Although these acts have generally been perceived as hooliganism, they could also be seen as a part of a growing atmosphere of tolerance to anti-Semitism that is based on support from many of Belgiums political elite of the Palestinian issue, even though the latter has thus far been limited to declarations and demonstrations.

There have been instances also of extreme right organizations profiting from the situation by pitting groups against each other. For instance, in September 2001, a tract attributed to a fundamentalist Islamic group was distributed in several quarters of Brussels. The tract was called Kill the Jews. After analysis of the pamphlet, it was determined by the Center for Equal Opportunities that it was a fake. (1)

Despite a law passed in 1995 making negationism illegal, since 1984 a small anti-Semitic group has circulated tracts attempting to bleach the Nazi regime by denying the crimes against humanity committed against the Jews during World War II. This Flemish group, the VHO (Vrij Historisch Onderzoek), was in June expanded to the (French-speaking) Walloon Region and Brussels Capital Region. (2)

The pro-Palestinian attitude of much of the Belgian media and the Belgian government and the subsequent cooling of relations between Israel and Belgium may also have involuntarily been conducive to the re-emergence of old prejudices and the open perpetration of physical and verbal harassment.

The unpopularity of Israeli Jews also gains ground amidst right, left and extreme left parties. In the Belgian media, the forum and opinion sections of newspapers have sometimes produced especially inflammatory and anti-Semitic pieces. For instance, in the Flemish news weekly P-Magazine on December 7, 2001, a journalist compared Israel to a tapeworm, systematically assassinating the Palestinians, and wrote that Judaism is arrogant and parasitic. (3) In Le Soir on December 15, 2001, columnist Simon-Pierre Nothomb compared Gaza to the Warsaw Ghetto and the Palestinian Authority to Judenrat. (4)

A 1993 law, amended in 1999, gives Belgian courts the authority to prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes regardless of the crimes connection to Belgium or the accuseds presence on Belgian soil. On the basis of that law, a complaint was filed against Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, for alleged war crimes against the Palestinians, but it was declared inadmissible in the Belgian courts in late June. (5) A complaint was also unsuccessfully lodged against Palestinian President Yasser Arafat.

In Belgium there exists a law against racism - the Loi Moureaux of July 1981. This law was invoked for the first time against a public TV network, the RTBF, which broadcast from a pub a talk show called Lieu public, on the theme Are Jews disliked? A complaint was received after this show that it was more inflammatory than informative. (6)

In June controversy emerged over financial reparations for property stolen from Jews during WW II. La Libre Belgique, a Catholic newspaper, headlined the story with Le monde juif lassaut des banques (The Jewish world at the assault of banks), following it with milliards, milliards (billions, billions). These headlines reinforced the stereotypes that Jews like money, which has historically been one of the principal focuses of anti-Jewish hatred. (7)

Specific incidents of 2002 (8)

Reports below do not include verbal harassment to the Jewish community which has occurred on a frequent basis. For instance, every Friday and Saturday, those attending services at the Avenue du Roi synagogue in Brussels (Forest) are assailed by anti-Jewish epithets such as Bastards, Dirty Jews, Well kill you! and Long live Bin Laden, from hooligans of Arabic descent. These incidents, too numerous to document, contribute to an overall atmosphere of growing anti-Semitism..

Specific reports of such harassment that do reach the media generally involve high-profile members of the Jewish community, such as Rabbi Richard Wertenschlag, leader of Lyons Jewish community, who in early April was taunted in Brussels by a group of Arab-looking teenagers with the phrase barbe de Juif (Jewish beard). (9)

The World Jewish Congress, which met in Brussels in late April, called European anti-Semitism the worst since World War II. In France and Belgium particularly, anti-Semitic violence was determined to be serious and frequent enough for the Simon Wiesenthal Center to issue a travel advisory that same month warning Jews to use extreme caution in traveling to those countries.

• On the night of 22 April, shots from an automatic weapon were fired at the synagogue in Charleroi. The synagogue was empty and no casualties were reported. Signs of some 18 bullets were discovered on the building. According to the police, the attacker or attackers fled the scene in a getaway car.

• On 21 April, the Chief Rabbi of Russia, who headed a delegation of the World Jewish Congress in Brussels, was attacked by a young person of Arabic origin. The attack occurred near the Gare du Midi when the rabbi was on his way to a demonstration against anti-Semitism held on Clinique Street in Brussels (Anderlecht). The rabbi was struck in the chest, called a Dirty Jew terrorist and robbed of his hat.

• On 19 April, a Jewish family living in Chausse de Gand in Brussels was harassed once more in a series of such incidents over the past several weeks. Things reached the point where a gang from the area attacked the familys vehicle scratching on it Dirty Jew and a Star of David.

• On 19 April, anti-Semitic graffiti was seen on Jewish-owned shops on Chausse de Gand in Brussels (Molenbeek). The graffiti read: Dirty Jew! and We will burn you. A large part of the population in Molenbeek is of Arab origin.

• On 18 April, a ceremony was held at the monument to the Belgian Jewish victims of the Holocaust in Brussels (Anderlecht). During the ceremony, some children created a commotion and threw stones at the participants in the ceremony. The police brought the hooligans under control and the ceremony continued.

• On 18 April, while a kosher restaurant near the Gare du Midi railway station in Brussels was closing for business, its owner heard the sound of a window being smashed. According to the police, the restaurants front window was shattered by a shot from an air rifle

• On 17 April at 0200 hours, vandals broke into a shop selling religious articles in Brussels (Ixelles), setting it on fire with kerosene. The shop was completely destroyed.

• On 4 April, three young Jewish men were attacked as they were leaving the synagogue of the Belz Hassidic community in Antwerp. The attackers were a group of about 30 Muslims who severely beat them up while shouting curses at the Jews, Israel and Prime Minister Sharon. One of the young men was hospitalized with serious injuries. The attack was perpetrated on a street near the synagogue, since the synagogue itself is guarded by police.

• On 4 April, in Antwerp, a city with a large Jewish population and a powerful extreme right political party (more than 30% at the last elections), the word Juif (Jewish) was discovered smeared on the walls of the houses.

• On 4 April, a Molotov Cocktail was thrown at the Old Synagogue in Antwerp. Visiting worshippers noticed soot on the walls apparently caused by a burning Molotov Cocktail.

• On 3 April, about 2000 people participated in an unlicensed and violent pro-Palestinian demonstration in central Antwerp. The demonstrators entered the Jewish quarter, burnt an Israeli flag, vandalized business establishments and torched automobiles. The rioters shouted epithets, including death to the Jews, and slogans condemning Israel and Prime Minister Sharon. Demonstrations were also held in Brussels, in which about 1000 people participated, and in Liege in which about 500 people participated. In these demonstrations, too, shouts in a similar vein were heard.

• On the night of 2nd and 3rd April, the window of a Jewish-owned travel agency in central Brussels was damaged with bricks. The agency markets flights and trips to Israel and carries the sign of El-Al Agency.

• On 3 April, vandals tossed Molotov Cocktails at a synagogue in the heart of a Jewish section of Antwerp. There were no casualties and only minor damage was caused.

• On 2 April, a car owned by a Jew was torched in a parking lot in Antwerp.

• On 1 April, at about 1:00 a.m., five Molotov Cocktails were thrown at the synagogue on Clinique St. In the Anderlecht section of Brussels. The Molotov Cocktails flew in through the second-story windows into the womens gallery, setting the benches on fire. The firefighters and police arrived quickly at the scene and brought the fire under control. There were no casualties and only slight damage.

• On 10 March, antisemitic graffiti was discovered near the Muse de LAquarium in Lige. The graffiti read Long live Bin-Laden. Death to the Jews.

• On 4 February, graffiti reading Death to the Jews was discovered on Jewish-owned shops in Brussels.

• On 25 January, drawings of swastikas and antisemitic slogans were found on the hand luggage of El-Al passengers in the sterile area of Brussels Airport. This is the third such incident at the Zaventem International Airport in Brussels recently, but this is the first time that the people who did this succeeded in slipping the material into the hand luggage of passengers of the Israeli airline in addition to spraying slogans on the outside of their luggage. The authorities have since adopted security measures designed to reveal the authors of these invective slogans.

• On 18 January, holes were discovered in a window of the second floor and in the wall opposite it in the synagogue on Clinique Street in the Anderlecht section of Brussels. These holes may have been the result of gunfire aimed at the synagogue

Specific events late 2001

• On 29 December, the outside gate of the Maaleh Synagogue in Brussels was smeared with the graffiti All the Jews will die in 2002.

• On 5 December, the Chief Rabbi of Brussels was attacked at a Metro station in Anderlecht by a group of Arab-looking youth. They shouted Dirty Jew in Arabic at the Rabbi and attacked him physically C they spat at him and kicked him in the face.

• On 3 December, while a religious Jew was filling his car at a gasoline station in Wieze (near Alost), two Belgian men in a car shouted at him Death to the Jews, and Long Live Bin-Laden.

• On 25 November 2001, an American Jew was attacked in Antwerp by three young men of Arab origin, who kicked him in the face. The same three had previously attacked a 12-year-old Jewish boy.

• On 1 November, a Jew was attacked while walking with his ten-year-old son in Parc Duden by some youths of Arabic origin. They threw stones at him and shouted death threats.

• On the 2nd and 3rd of October, three antisemitic incidents took place at Place Rochefort in Brussels (Forest). On 3 October, the rabbi of the synagogue on Avenue Du Roi left the synagogue together with his family. As they were crossing Place Rochefort, a group of about 50 Arab youths began throwing chestnuts at them and shouting Death to the Jews and Dirty Jew.

On 2 October, 2001, the rabbis family had been the victim of a similar incident. A group of about 10 Arab youths harassed and cursed the family. Among other things, they shouted More dirty Jews C well send you Bin-Laden. They also threw chestnuts at the rabbi.

On 3 October, 2001, in the afternoon hours, this same rabbi was walking toward the synagogue accompanied by another person. When they again reached Place Rochefort, four Arab youths once again began throwing chestnuts at them and shouting Death to the Jews and the like. The youths ran after the rabbi and his friend. One of them tossed a garbage can at the rabbi.

• On 29 September at around noon, after prayers had ended at the synagogue on Clinique Street in Brussels (Anderlecht), the worshippers were cursed at and threatened. This was one of many incidents of physical and verbal attack on the worshippers from this synagogue.

FOOTNOTES

• (1) Egalit et diversit: Rapport annuel 2001, Centre pour lgalit des chances et la lutte contre le racisme, March 2002. Also see Un pamphlet antismite circule dans les milieux pro-palestiniens radicaux, Le Monde, June 21, 2002.
• (2) Manuel Abramowicz, Ngationnisme belge: Cration dune branche francophone, June 12, 2002, http://www.resistances.be/negat0.html.
• (3) See Nicolas Zomersztajn, Le malaise des Juifs: mythe ou ralit?, Regards no. 514, pp. 32-35.
• (4) Nothomb, Simon-Pierre, Le Soir (Opinions et dbats), December 15, 2001, at http://doc.lesoir.be/scripts/$cshtml.exe?TO_PAGE=lesoir/recherche/recherche:LANG=Francais.
• (5) See Jean-Pierre Staercke, La plainte contre Sharon irrecevable en Belgique, Liberation, June 27, 2002.
• (6) Lieu public pour cible, Le Soir, March 23-24, 2002.
• (7) See Spoliation des biens juifs: un conflit au service de lantismitisme, and Comment faire plaisir aux antismites et aux islamophobes? http://www.resistances.be/antisem08.html.
• (8) Source: http://www.antisemitism.org.il/. For an update, go to http://www.antisemitism.org.il/search.htm.
• (9) Knight Ridder Washington Bureau, April 23, 2002.

Back to the Table of Contents

Controversy over surveillance of the Muslim community by the Intelligence Services

HRWF International Secretariat (17.07.2002) - Website http://www.hrwf.net - E-mail info@hrwf.net - The Belgian Permanent Committee of the Control of Intelligence Services (? Comit R ?) recently transmitted its Ninth Report to the President of the Senate, the President of the House of Representatives, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of National Defense.

The surveillance of the activities of various Muslim and Islamic institutions by the Intelligence Services is currently at the heart of a heated debate that has been reflected in the media.

As the place of Islam is increasingly becoming an issue in a number of states of the European Union, we want to give you access to the points of view developed by the actors involved in this issue on the Belgian scene.

Please find a number of attachments with texts in the original language (French) and in English translation (*) :

• - ? Intelligence services target Belgian Islamism ? (? La S?ret pingle lislamisme belge ?)
• - ? Islam as seen by the Comit R ? (? Lislam vu par le Comit R ?)
• - ? Open letter from the Muslim Executive to Mr. Armand De Decker, President of the Senate and of the Follow-Up Commission (Lettre ouverte Monsieur Armand De Decker)
• - ? The religion of Islam : to guarantee tolerance ? (? Religion islamique : garantir la tolrance ?)

(*)Translation by Colleen Chen, Harvard Law School, for Human Rights Without Frontiers

Intelligence services target Belgian Islamism

The report of the ? Comit R ? focuses on projects incompatible with democracy

It deals with mosques and shady associations

By Ronald Planchar

La Libre (06.06.2002)/ HRWF International Secretariat (17.07.2002) - Website http://www.hrwf.net - E-mail info@hrwf.net - If the 2001 annual report of the ? Comit R ? (Permanent Committee for the Control of Information Services) seems exceptionally detailed with regard to extremist Islamism in Belgium, this is due to the closure of an investigation opened in 1998 with regard to the manner in which the S?ret (Belgiums intelligence services) treated this issue. Despite the difficulties they encountered, its agents carried out their mission quite well, not because their assignment was to monitor a religion practiced by worshippers who are in the great majority democrats, but because extremists ignore the message of tolerance of the Koran. These extremists assert that the Koran covers all sectors of society - including justice, education, and government. This is in total contradiction to a democratic and modern vision of the State, which is therefore to be protected. This is where the role of the S?ret comes into play.

Several hard-line tendencies exist in Belgium. The Tabligh practices in theory an apolitical and nonviolent proselytism. The trouble, says the report, is that it is thought that the movement could be diverted and used as a vehicle for radical Islamism, notably in prisons and hospitals, through prisoners and/or chaplains.

The Muslim Brothers scene, which monitors a worldwide network of various organizations, demands ? the application of Islamic law, the sharia, for Muslim communities established in Europe, ? reported the ? Comit R . ? They practice infiltration into organs of representation (this is also true for the Muslim Executive of Belgium) and on top of that, would use a clandestine structure within our country, looking to spread their ideology particularly among youths. They have founded several non-profit organizations (2), some of which publish anti-western and anti-Zionist newspapers, or organize indoctrination camps.

A majority to protect

Salafism also runs non-profit organizations. In 1999, the S?ret noted the circulation of videocassettes originating from the organization of Osama Bin Laden, in two of them. (3)

The Milli Gors (an extreme right group unifying fundamentalist and nationalist Turks) opened in Hainaut the Institute of Islamic Sciences Avicenne, where young Turks receive what the S?ret calls ? fanatic indoctrination ?

As for the mosques, about thirty (out of some 300) are considered ? radical ? and are under surveillance (only from time to time, due to lack of means) as they often open their doors to imams or extremist speeches. Even very well-known places are involved, such as the Grand Mosque of Brussels, where ? particularly virulent sermons have been delivered, notably against Brussels, named the capital of kafirs (impious people) ?, noted the ? Comit R ,? adding, ? to the great displeasure of the moderate Muslims who habitually frequent it. ? The moderates? A crushing majority who also deserves to be protected.

• (1) The report can be found on the Internet at http://www.comiteri.be
• (2) The International Union of Student Organizations, the Islamic Union of Youths, the Humanitarian Association for the Promotion of Belgian Youths, and the Islamic Intercultural League of Belgium.
• (3) Garden of Youths, Center of Education and Culture of Islamic Youths

Islam as seen by the ? Comit R ?

The report of the ? Comit R ? on Islamic activities in our country makes itself noticed.

However, it contains only summary information from second- or third-hand sources

By Felice Dassetto and Brigitte Marchal

Professor and Assistant Researcher at UCL

La Libre Belgique (26.06.2002)/ HRWF International Secretariat (17.07.2002) - Website http://www.hrwf.net - E-mail info@hrwf.net - The 2001 report of the Permanent Committee for Control of Intelligence Services (? Comit R ?) makes itself noticed. This text purports to evaluate the activity of the S?ret and other intelligence services about ? extremist and terrorist Islamic activity. ? However, the report also purports to provide information and analyses about political Islam in general and in Belgium, on the basis of documents from the S?ret as well as from various publications. It is this aspect that we would like to comment on. This report is very disappointing throughout. It is incomprehensible why it has aroused such acclaim among the members of parliament.

On the publications used by the report: one is struck by the indiscriminate melange of scientific or journalistic sources, the satirical tracts, vague articles or individual opinions. It all looks good for the ? Comit R ? authors. Or almost all. In reality, they neglect some basic publications. The authors are apparently not very willing to read in languages other than French, in which many very relevant analyses on specific aspects of political Islam are found. Even though this report takes on the status of an official document, it cobbles together summary information from second- or third-hand sources.

On the analysis : In intelligence services, there is a strong emphasis on the importance of being able to analyze and contextualize data. Now, this report falls short when compared to what is available on European Islam and lacks a minimum of the editorial seriousness one might expect. Some examples:

Lets take ? The general perspective on the expansion of Islam. ? Here is a summary presentation of Islamic political movements. It is followed by a comment on the feeling of rejection experienced by Muslims in Europe (in general, at least). This is based on a French survey that states that 24% of practicing youths feel rejected. After a statement about the Ummah, which is said to cement the marginalized population, it is mentioned that young Magrebins in the French suburbs are trained for jihad in camps in Afghanistan. As a conclusion, citing Antoine Sfeir, who is not the most objective source on the matter: ? Muslim or Islamic organizations (are they the same thing ?) that are recognized in Europe are clever enough to stay within the law. ? But what exactly is this page and a half talking about ? Is this text a media tabloid, a conversation at a bar that mixes everything up, or is this a document from an official agency of the Belgian state ?

Second example : in the paragraph entitled ? Islam in Belgium, ? the report states that ? the population of the Muslim denomination in Belgium is estimated at more than 350,000 persons ? This summary remark is like saying, as do certain reactionary Muslims, that nine million Christians live in Belgium. For years, scientists (of which we are included, in books that the authors ignore) have emphasized that those who adhere to Islam make up only a part of those designated so in the population. There are also agnostics, those who are indifferent, and people attached to the culture of Islam as any European to the works linked to the Christian culture. In vain.

Furthermore, the report continues by saying : ? The installation of political Islam in Belgium was realized () in three phases. ? So, the 350,000 people are all ? of the Muslim denomination ? and, moreover, are all tied to the installation of political Islam ? No ! respond the authors, we didnt want to say that, but it was necessary to summarize and make it brief. Of course.

Third example : the paragraph concerning the Muslim Brothers. They appear to be the targets of this report, amidst a number of imprecisions, as many qualitative as quantitative. It is presented as ? the most important Islamic organization in the Arab world ,? but four paragraphs later we read that the brotherhood (sic-it has become a brotherhood) ? does not, however, constitute a well-unified entity from an ideological and strategic point of view that could be justified by both domestic and foreign interests. ? Besides some geographical confusion, by the end its still not known whether the report is talking about movements in Muslim countries or in Belgium. The essentialism and the literalism of its approach are astounding. It leaves no room even for the possibility of change within these movements and for a different perception by some Muslims living in Europe. The only dynamic imagined is that of the ? re-Islamization of society at the world level, ? or one that envisions ? trying to convert non-Muslim countries or at least using their democratic rules to vote in laws conforming to the Islamic model. ? On what are these expeditious and inexact assertions founded ?

Lets move to more particular facts : the information in the report was, as a whole, already known through research work, media articles, and judicial information. Why then such emotional reactions from the members of parliament ? Where are they living? Have they finally realized that Islam, in all its facets, is a part of the European landscape and that there are no definite authorities or diplomatic contacts that can change or control these dynamics ?

As stated earlier, the information is badly contextualized. It is sometimes fairly truncated ; the text does not allow a complete understanding of the dynamics of how the representative authority of Muslims works (it eclipses the tactlessness of the Belgian state), nor the context within which certain Muslim actors operate and the sordid games played by some European states.

Lets stop on a paragraph concerning a very well-known European Muslim leader, the Swiss Tariq Ramadan. This case is interesting because it reveals the way the report argues, and moreover because it sheds light on what might be the fundamental motives of ? Comit R ?s report.

T . Ramadan is classified among the Muslim Brothers. Ramadan denies it, states the report, ? but he is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brothers. ? To be someones grandson explains everything, even if T. Ramadan has written a book explaining how he has understood his grandfathers and his fathers commitments. The report states that, according to the S?ret, this leader ? pleads for a critical intercommunity dialogue and recommends to Muslims that they get involved in community life in an active and constructive manner ? and that after September 11, ? only a few Muslim intellectuals, among them T. Ramadan, called nevertheless for a critical feeling and for introspection. ? On the other hand, says the report ? The S?ret notes that the moderate discourse that T. Ramadan makes in public does not always correspond with the statements that he makes within a restricted Islamic milieu, where he reveals clearly a more critical attitude towards western society. ? What conclusion should one draw from these partially contradictory assertions ? Are they echoing old well-known rumors or are they founded on proof that would lead to suspecting this man ? These assertions, contained in a report by the S?ret and publicized by a public authority, concern a private person, who has never been indicted for anything. So, are they legitimate ? Have the members of parliament become aware that the revelation of ? a more critical attitude towards western society ? has become worrisome from securitys point of view by the S?ret?

On the S?rets notes concerning T. Ramadan, the ? Comit R ? adds references of alarming articles and an extract from an interview of Father Christian Delorme who, for a while, has increased the number of his speeches with regard to Ramadan, reflecting perhaps his frustration with the failure of a certain form of Islamic-Christian dialogue.The treatment of the data concerning this person clarifies perhaps the overall intention of the report. The ? Comit R , ? by juxtaposing the sources of the S?ret with other references (which are, moreover, very selective), wants to present a twofold conclusion. On one hand, it wants to prove that there is an Islamic danger, even latent, indeed generalized, in the face of which more surveillance is justified. On the other hand, the conclusion wants to suggest that the S?ret did not (completely) do its job. The proof is that elsewhere, one knows and one says things. If one wants to prove all of this, one must tackle the issue and collect information some other way. Otherwise this report would have to be done all over again.

Open letter from the Muslim Executive to Mr. Armand De Decker, President of the Senate and of the Follow-Up Commission

HRWF International Secretariat (17.07.2002) - Website http://www.hrwf.net - E-mail info@hrwf.net

Brussels, June 28, 2002

Mr. President,

We, Presidents of the Executive and of the General Assembly (GA) of the Muslims of Belgium, address this letter to you regarding the report from the investigation initiated by Comit R and more particularly about the chapter relating to the manner in which intelligence services deal with Islamic, extremist, and terrorist activities.

The least that can be mentioned is about the stupefaction that the reading of this document provoked inside the Muslim Executive and the General Assembly. In fact, it presents our institutions as close to movements that are in turn fanatical, extremist, fundamentalist, Islamic, integrist, or radical. The terms used pell-mell leave us to think that the study did not in the least burden itself with a methodology worthy of the name (1) and that the confusion and the amalgamations--those which one has been rightly denouncing since the attacks of September 11--took hold of the authors of the document. For proof, numerous parliamentary questions and interpellations are reported, but curiously the report omits raising that they come mostly from the Vlaams Blok, the grand agitator of scarecrows from which the disturbing wind blows in this file.

Why shouldnt one be surprised and shocked that the ? Comit R ? presents all the institutions elected by the Muslim community (the Muslim Executive, the General Assembly of the Muslims of Belgium, the Superior Council of the Muslims of Belgium) as being extremist or strongly influenced by them ?

To feed this phobia and this hostile climate that surrounds the Muslim minority, a series of elements that are obviously contrary to the truth--that are even slanderous--are advanced :

• Concerning the supposed financing of the Superior Council of the Muslims by the Executive (p. 32), this would be impossible, since all our expenses are subject to an internal audit and control from an external independent auditor and the Court of Accounting. To this day, our accounts have never suffered any irregularity.

• Concerning the elections of December 1998 during which the current General Assembly and the Executive were chosen, the report informs us, to our great surprise, that they were tainted by irregularities noticed by the S?ret (p. 130). However, the Accompanying Commission (2)--charged at the time with assuring a good process in the 98 elections, and presided over by Mr. MARTENS, judge at the Court of Arbitration, and composed of representatives of the Provisional Executive of the Muslims, the Center for Equal Opportunities, and the Ministers of the Interior and of Justice--never found, to our knowledge, the slightest irregularity. These elections were even acclaimed by all the parties concerned.

• With a certain confusion, indeed, certainly with confusion, the report mentioned two ? screenings ? performed by the S?ret (p. 131). Unless this information was purposely hidden from us, in the facts, a sole ? screening ?--on the proposed candidates for the Representative Body of the Muslims--took place.

On the other hand, if at the time, we had accepted the principle of a ? screening, ? this was on the sole condition that the Minister of Justice justify in whatever measure possible the reasons for rejecting one candidate or another. To this day, not one explanation concerning the refusal of certain candidates has been advanced, but all the constitutionalists consulted at our initiative are unanimous with regard to the illegal, abusive, and discriminatory character of this ? screening. ? From that time, how can the General Assembly reasonably and properly accept a principle of selection contrary to constitutional regulations and, moreover, imposed exclusively on the Muslim denomination?

Nothing justifies this discrimination, not even the absence of a clergy (3) or the attacks of September 11, all the more reason being that all the candidates who were presented at the elections had to sign a charter in which they officially pledged to act ? in respect of the Royal Constitution, the Laws and the Institutions of the Belgian people, ? in this way leaving to Justice the care of prosecuting and punishing everyone violating the laws of our country.

• In other respects, the General Assembly is presented by the report as an illegitimate and manipulative entity, infiltrated or influenced by ? extremist groups . ? In effect, the report declares in substance that the dissolution of the GA was called for, and that in maintaining its existence, it is trying to disregard the opinion of the authorities. (p. 131)

At first, putting in place the Representative Body of the Muslims after the elections as the sole official interlocutor of the Belgian state was effectively leading to the dissolution of the Provisional Executive of the Muslims, but not of the current Constituent Assembly. Only the Assembly of the time was targeted, as it had no more reason to exist after the elections. Now, the report does not seem to differentiate between them and leaves doubt hanging dangerously over the legitimacy of the General Assembly produced by the elections of December 1998.

As for the Protestant Church, the GA is not required to dissolve at all, since it is the direct emanation from the Muslim community and thus is the sovereign organ and mandates the Executive.

Moreover, the authorities are not permitted to give any advice concerning the internal functioning of a religions administrative organs, as a legal regulation consecrating the ? neutrality ? of the state forbids any form of state interference in the affairs of a religion.

To recall, in May 1998, the Provisional Executive submitted an official report to the Council of Ministers at the time, supported by the latter, in which the form of collaboration envisaged and desired between the Executive and the GA was laid out in detail. After the elections, the Justice Administration itself supplied us, as an example, the Internal Regulations (IR) officially in force for the Protestant Church. The deposit of our IR governing relations between the GA and the Executive was then enacted by the Minister of Justice himself on December 1, 2000.

Regarding the supposed ? pressure ? that the GA would maintain on the members of the Executive, this is nothing other than the legitimate exercise of its prerogative of control that any Assembly has on its executive or on its board of directors in a law-based state.

• On the other hand, inside the Central Council of the Muslims of Belgium (CCMB) (4), there is no question of ? establishing a new Council of Wisemen as a spiritual authority for the Belgian Muslims. ? (p. 131)

Regarding the charter actually signed by the members of the Executive on the GAs proposition (p. 131), we do not see how this constitutes a problem, since our IR recognizes for the GA the right to elaborate and to dictate the basic orientations of the institution (Article 126) and to exercise its role of controlling the effectuation of its policy (Article 128). In other respects, the recommendations formulated by the GA are of a technical and procedural nature and concern basically the administrative aspects of the religion. (5)

It works the same in all the administations charged with management functions of a religion and that are recognized by the state. In this way, the IR of the Protestant Synod, in its Article 29, stipulates that ? [] the Synodal Council is charged with the execution of the decisions of this (Synodal) Assembly and of the transmission of its recommendations ?

Also, in view of the preceding statement, we find it important to tell you straightforwardly that a certain amount of data concerning the Executive and the General Assembly of the Muslims of Belgium are unfounded allegations, fantastic and even defamatory and that they are certainly coming from ? detractors ? with whom we do not fear any confrontation.

All together, this report is peppered with historical aberrations and methodological errors and reflects the prejudices and rumors conveyed in our society more than objective reality, opening the door both to disinformation and abuse. Concerning, for example, the school Al Ghazali--a primary faith-based school, which follows the official pedagogical program and is located in the premises of the Islamic and Cultural Center of Brussels, as it lacks both financial means and adequate buildings--the report suggests that this school is nothing less than a training institution where the exegesis of the Koran is allegedly taught to children aged between 6 and 12 years (p. 127)!! Another striking example among others, is the statement that since 1978, the Center has been receiving subsidies to pay some 600 religious teachers. Now, the salaries of Islamic religious teachers are paid by the French Community (p. 127)!! (6)

Because of this, it is seriously doubtful that this data originates from the S?ret--whose role is necessary in a law-based state--to which it is difficult to ascribe erroneous data since this administration is subjected to a discretionary authority.

All of this leads to the belief that this data is working directly to discredit and to destabilize official institutions--in this case those of the Muslim religion--nevertheless elected democratically and of which the process of recognition and the existence, it is necessary to recall, were and remain most often dependent on a reading of Islam from the point of view of security. Obviously, the Muslim religion is the only religion falling victim to a different and arbitrary treatment, and this is in flagrant violation of constitutional rules and the most elementary rights.

Because of this, it is not surprising that Islamophobia is gaining more and more ground in Belgium (7) and that it reinforces the basic discourse of a growing number of ?politically correct intellectuals ? whose declarations and diatribes strongly contribute to the legitimacy of this ambient racism.

We deplore, once more, the lumping together of Muslim citizens practicing their faith and active in the human community, and extremists and/or terrorists.

Also, in order to avoid the retreats into the identity of their forefathers and the tensions provoked by this type of lumping together inside the Muslim community, we call for more discernment, intellectual probity, reasoning and critical distancing by the authorities, the media, and civil society in general.

Considering the importance of this letter, we will make sure that it is publicized. Firmness is justified with regard to the flagrant enormities of the report, its negative consequences on public opinion and the anti-Muslim racism that it could produce.

Therefore, we would like to be received by the ? Comit R ? in order to emphasize the point of view of the representatives of the Muslim community.

We emphasize once again our strong devotion to the values and to the principles of our law-based state and of our democracy that we will continue to defend whatever the circumstances. The future of harmonious relations between all the components of society is at stake.

Best regards,

Nordin Maloujahmoum, Mohamed Boulif,

President EMB President AGMB

FOOTNOTES

(1) See on this subject the article by Felice Dasseto and Brigitte Marechal, ? Islam vu par le Comit R/ (Islam seen by the Comit R), in La Libre Belgique, June 27, 2002.

(2) See the Ministerial Decree of September 24, 1998 about the Accompanying Commission and the organizing of elections of a representative organ of the Islamic religion.

(3) Note that the Catholic clergy retains sovereignty in naming its ? representatives . ?

(4) The CCMB is made up of the Constituent Assembly and the Executive.

* Note that the ? Council of Wisemen ? is the consultative organ put into place in June 1990 by the government in order to thwart the communal initiative of the Islamic and Cultural Center of Brussels and of the Royal Commissariat to Immigrant Policy (currently the Center for Equal Opportunities). The royal decree of November 16, 1990 recognizing this Council was abolished by the decree of July 3, 1996 instituting the Provisional Muslim Executive (see the work from Lionel Panafit, Quand le droit crit lislam. Lintgration juridique de lislam en Belgique/ (When the law writes Islam : the legal integration of Islam in Belgium), Bruylant 1999, Brussels.

(5) See the ? Comit R ? report, pg. 130, point O, 2.

(6) HRWF footnote: The French Community is a federated entity of the Federal State of Belgium, which finances public and faith-based schools in the French-speaking part of the country.

(7) See the Press Release of the EMB (January 12, 2001) and the report ? Islamophobia in the EU since September 11 ? of the European Observatory of Racist and Xenophobic Phenomena (May 23, 2002).

The religion of Islam : to guarantee tolerance

Le Soir (05.07.2002)/ HRWF International Secretariat (17.07.2002) - Website http://www.hrwf.net - E-mail info@hrwf.net - On Tuesday, before the parliament of the French Community, Pierre Hazette (MR*) criticized certain Islamic religious teachers who have been circulating literature that advocates behavior contrary to democratic foundations.

Responding to a question from Derbaki Sba? (MR), the Minister for Secondary School Education confirmed that an Islamic religious teacher of the City of Brussels had not challenged literature brought to class by a student praising chastity or denouncing the dangers of ? coeducational workplaces. ?

Hazette informed the president of the Muslim Executive of Belgium. The latter responded that these ideas are poles apart from the teaching Muslim religious teachers should be disseminating.

For Hazette, this incident is not an isolated one, and cases have also been reported of classes during which visits are made to Internet sites that promote hate and violence or encourage the wearing of the veil.

The minister emphasizes that this behavior is not representative of Islamic religious classes as a whole. But in order to guarantee the spirit of openness and tolerance present in the decree of neutrality, he said, announcing that a draft decree focusing this time on neutrality in public schools will be presented at the start of the new parliamentary year. From then on, teachings that promote inequalities will be subject to sanctions, from warning to revocation.

A circular will also be sent to the heads of schools to urge them to notify the Muslim Executive of all questionable behavior from Islamic religious teachers. From school year 2002-03 onwards, three inspectors of Muslim religion will be appointed and the decree on neutrality will define the nomination conditions for Muslim religious teachers by the government.

Back to the Table of Contents

The Catholic Church heads to the frontlines

By Christian Laporte

Le Soir (11.06.2002)/ HRWF International Secretariat (11.06.2002) - Website http://www.hrwf.net - E-mail info@hrwf.net - Ever since the Minister of Primary Education, Jean-Marc Nollet, and the Minister-President of the French Community, Herv?Hasquin, delivered a public blow to the philosophical discussion groups in primary schools in a Le Soir article of May 23, voices have raised every day to defend religious and nondenominational ethics classes.

The lay group, Les Amis de la Morale (Friends of Ethics), were the first to react against what they considered as opening the way toward a progressive extinguishment of these classes, with the social consequences that could arise accordingly. Opinions are divided among Christian groups and the spokepersons of several denominations.

The Catholic church is, in its turn, coming out of the woods with its own sales talk. For Cardinal Daneels and Bishops De Kesel, Jousten, Lonard and Huard, the introduction of philosophy discussion groups in official basic school is a strategy that has as an acknowledged goal the replacement of ethics and religion classes with philosophy. They add that it would be dangerous to want to stifle the tens of thousands of voices that have expressed themselves in favor of the current philosophy classes. They make a direct allusion to the petition, launched at the end of 1999, that collected more than 150,000 signatures expressing support for maintaining the status quo.

For the bishops, the proposed means to organize these classes better, made by the Saint-Boniface agreements, should not circumvent the express wishes of representatives of public opinion in order to fulfill the goals of the five religious groups recognized by the Belgian Constitution. And to conclude, the work of all these masters of ethics and religion, as well as the pluralism of official teaching, deserve better than these projects oriented towards a single philosophical strain.

Back to the Table of Contents

Conversion of a minor to Judaism, a controversial issue

About the negative influence of the Belgian Parliamentary Commission on Cults

Willy Fautr, Human Rights Without Frontiers

HRWF International Secretariat (07.06.2002) Email info@hrwf.net - Website http://www.hrwf.net - A mother opposes the conversion of her seventeen-year old son on the grounds that he wants to join a Jewish group suspected of being a harmful cult by the Belgian Parliamentarian Enquiry Commission on Cults.

Patrick, a Portuguese born in Belgium, was raised as a Catholic by his mother. At one point, he discovered that his name was Jewish. He then did some genealogical research and found out that his forefathers on his mothers and on his fathers sides had been forcibly converted from [kwa1] Judaism, probably at the time of the Inquisition. At school, P.[kwa2] opted for Jewish religious classes and later on decided to attend a Jewish school officially financed by the Flemish Ministry of Education. At the same time, he joined a branch of Hassidic Judaism called Satmar. There are about 12,000 Satmar families in the world. About 1,000 Satmars live in Belgium, mainly in Antwerp. In the middle of the nineties, a case of parental kidnapping involving a Satmar father and a Catholic mother shed some negative light on that movement. It was then accused of smuggling the missing children to the U.S., where they were found living with a Jewish family more than five years later. Referring to that event and to the anonymous testimony of a single individual, the Belgian Parliamentary Commission on Cults put the Satmars on the list of cults suspected of being harmful and dangerous.

When Patrick decided to convert to Judaism, his mother was not opposed to it. He was already abiding by the rules of his new religion but he still needed to be circumcised. The rabbi asked for his mothers agreement and sent her a form to be signed. In the meantime, she was approached by some people who told her the Belgian Parliamentary Commission on Cults had listed the Satmars as a harmful cult. Consequently, she refused to sign the form, which was not a problem for the rabbi as proselytism does not exist in Judaism. However, the relations with her son worsened dramatically. Through her attorney, she appealed to public prosecutor. In January 2002, two policewomen in plain clothes were assigned by the public prosecutor to warn him about the Satmars and to convince him that he should stop attending the Jewish school in Antwerp.

On 26 February 2002, the Juvenile Court of Brussels heard in first instance Patrick and his mother. The young man was defended by an inexperienced and unconvinced pro bono attorney. The mothers attorney claimed a confinement measure, and the prosecution requested, on the basis of article 50 of the 8 April 1965 Law on Youth Protection, that an investigation procedure be commenced and the young man possibly be put in confinement. The Court ruled provisionally that Patrick was to be put under surveillance by a competent social service. However, his mother judged that the measure was not sufficient and wanted him to be confined so that all his links with the Satmars could be cut off.

On 8 March 2002, the mother lodged an appeal, as did the public prosecutor. During the litigation that took place on 16 April, the judge and the public prosecutor disapproved of the young mans behavior and warned him against the dangerous cult. On 22 April, the Court of Appeal of Brussels stated that the youths faith was unwavering but he was immature and intolerant and he was unable to consider his faith with some distance. It ruled that he had to attend the school chosen by his mother and to come home every day and that the surveillance by a competent social service would continue. The result of the courts decision was that Patrick was not permitted to go[kwa3] to the Jewish boarding school in Antwerp. A state educational assistance service was appointed to help him resume a normal life with his mother.

Patrick told Human Rights Without Frontiers that the courts of first instance and of appeal were biased against the Satmars because of the Parliamentary Report on Cults and he was not ready to wait until his majority (18 years) to live according to his faith and to attend a Talmudic school.

Back to the Table of Contents

American Pentecostals arrested and deported

Four Christian Women are Expelled After Strict Enforcement

of a 1999 Law

by Willy Fautre

Compass (08.03.2002)/ HRWF (12.03.2002) Email info@hrwf.net - Website http://www.hrwf.net - In early February, Belgian police questioned 29 American volunteers working for the Assemblies of God (AOG) in the suburbs of Brussels for possibly violating a work permit law passed by the Belgian government in 1999. Four of the Christians were detained and then deported to the United States after being charged with being "illegal workers."

An Assemblies of God News Service report on February 20 said, "The church has immigration lawyers working on the case with officials from the Belgium government. Until this point, we were totally unaware of the strict enforcement of this law. We are presently working through what we would see as aberrations on the application of the law."

Without a search warrant on February 7, ten armed policemen and three social inspectors raided the AOG's International Christian Academy and the International Media Ministries center located in Rhode Saint Genese. Some burst into the elementary school attended by about 35 children and confronted the six teachers in front of the children. Most of the pupils' parents are missionaries, ambassadors or employees of international institutions such as NATO.

The officials interrogated 29 people, checked their identity documents and took five women to the police station. One was the grandmother of one of the male students. She was staying in Belgium for only a few days and happened to be in a classroom when the crackdown occurred. She was released after her interview. Two women had been in Belgium for five and 15 days with legal tourist visas. They were using their vacations to do volunteer work. They were taken into custody and deported on the next day.

The other two women had been hired as volunteer teachers in Fall 2001 for the private elementary school that was just opening its doors. Both had gone to Belgium with a three-month tourist visa and were expecting visas and residence permits for a longer period from the Belgian consulate in Chicago that they never received. The tourist visas of the two volunteer teachers had expired. They were also detained and deported.

No official reason has been given for not granting new visas to the two teachers. But two years ago, Mormon missionaries were denied visas by a Belgian consulate in the U.S. because their church was on a parliamentary list of religious movements suspected of being "dangerous sects." The delivery of visas to Mormon volunteers was not resumed until the Belgian Sect Observatory declared it was not a dangerous sect. The Assemblies of God is on the same list.

"The officers told these girls that they would be deported because volunteer workers need a work permit in Belgium," Gerald Branum, European director of the Assemblies of God Foreign Missions, told Compass. "Initially, we thought there would be negotiations and appeals. So, you can imagine how shocked we were when the authorities told us that they could not leave the police station, they could not go back home to pack their bags and they could not talk with anyone from the outside."

In their cell, a notice was posted saying that prisoners have the right to make a phone call, to have access to an attorney and to get meals at regular times. However, the four women were denied each of these rights. As there was no bed, they asked for mattresses and for blankets, but what they were given was dirty and smelled of urine.

During the 14 hours they were detained, the women received a pre-packed waffle only after they had asked for some food. At one point, a male prisoner -- supposedly a drug dealer -- was introduced into their cell. He reportedly tried to make them say negative statements about the police, but they replied that they loved them as Jesus had loved His enemies. After some time, a policeman took the "drug dealer" out on the pretext that he had been put in the wrong cell, but the women saw that he was given a gun and concluded he was also a policeman whose task was to spy on them.

AOG officials identified the four women as Julia Ryser, Bonnie Dyess, Trista Logering and Kristi Hoggard. They returned to the United States on February 8.

For years, American Pentecostals have gone to Belgium as volunteers to take part in various activities of the media department, the Bible correspondence education program or the ministry to universities. They have never had visa problems before.

While the AOG is on the list of religious movements suspected by the state of being "dangerous sects," it is also a member of the Federal Synod of Protestant and Evangelical Churches in Belgium, which is negotiating with the state-recognized United Protestant Church of Belgium to provide a common platform for relations with the state.

The AOG numbers about 5,800 members among 70 congregations in Belgium.

Interviewed by the Catholic daily newspaper "La Libre Belgique," Eric Brasseur, director of the Belgium Sect Observatory, said the Assemblies of God "are among the churches that pose the most problems to the public. It is about them that we have received the most unsolicited testimonies." He added that families feel concerned when they see major changes in the behavior of one of their members who has become a Pentecostal. Brasseur said that the movement required a great commitment and much piety, which could lead to deviancies in fragile people.

Brasseur told Compass that the teaching of faith healing by the AOG is a problem because "it psychologically prevents the believers from making the necessary step to visit a medical doctor or a hospital."

Paul Devos, associate pastor at the AOG's Christian Center, said that the Assemblies of God do not preach the rejection of medical treatments and are ready to open a dialogue with state authorities to clarify that point of their theology.

The church is now investigating the permit status of the 75 Assemblies of God missions personnel who remain in Belgium. Thomas Trask, AOG general superintendent, called for a day of fasting and prayer on February 21 for those still working in Belgium.

Back to the Table of Contents

Assemblies missionaries face guns in Belgium

The three women, along with a tourist, are forced to leave the country

by Linda Leicht

News Leaders (09.02.2002) / HRWF (13.02.2002) C Website http://www.hrwf.net C Email info@hrwf.net - The Assemblies of God is trying to find out why four American women were evicted from Belgium on Friday, accused of working without proper permits.

The four women, including an Evangel University graduate, were at an Assemblies of God mission in Brussels on Thursday when police came and took them to jail. They flew back to the United States on Friday.

"Everyone is here and safe," said Terry Hoggard, whose daughter, Kristi, was one arrested. He and his wife, Ruthanne, accompanied all four women to the United States to ensure that they arrived safely.

Terry Hoggard, who arrived with his family at Springfield-Branson Regional Airport late Friday, said events happened so quickly it will take time to process them."This is a world we don't know," he said Kristi Hoggard was too shaken to comment Friday night.

Anita van Gorp, principal at the International Christian Academy, said 10 police took away the women. "My children were very frightened. There were 10 men with guns," she told The Associated Press.

"We are totally in the dark on why this happened," spokeswoman Juleen Turnage said at Assemblies of God headquarters in Springfield. In an effort to get an explanation, area directors in Belgium will meet with government officials Monday and Tuesday, she said. Church officials will also interview the women.

Assemblies officials in Belgium are "in the process of ascertaining what precipitated this," said Greg Mundis, Europe regional director for the Assemblies."We will then, based on their understanding, respond."

Kristi Hoggard is a recent Evangel graduate and Central Bible College alumnus. Her parents operate the International Media Ministries where the women were arrested.

Hoggard is a missionary associate, as are two of the other women, Bonnie Dyess of Garland, Texas, and Trista Logering of Cape Coral, Fla.,Turnage said. Missionary associates are appointed for one or two years. And raise their own funds from supporters in the United States.

"They don't take a dime out of the Belgium economy," she said. The fourth woman, Julia Ryser of Tulsa, Okla., was starting a tour of Europe. "She was not engaged in mission work," Turnage said. Ryser had been in the country only five days and was visiting at the church.

Police arrested the women at the mission in Sint-Genesius-Rode, claiming they were working illegally on tourist visas. Another woman, Carol Jezek of Milwaukee, was given five days to leave Belgium, van Gorp said.

Turnage said none of the volunteer missionaries in Belgium have work permits, although all the women had valid visas.

The Assemblies of God has 75 missions people in Belgium and has had missionaries there since 1949, Turnage said. There is also a theological seminary and an international correspondence school.

"The government has always recognized the people under missions appointments are there at their own expense to do ministries. They have never required work permits."

The change in requirement baffled Assemblies officials and others.

CBC missions director Harold Carpenter has done mission work around the world and in Belgium. "Belgium had not previously required work permits," he said. "That's what is so strange to me, because Belgium hadn't required anything before."

Other countries do require missions or service visas, he said. "It's getting more and more common that you have to have a visa for specific type of work when you go into a country."

Kurt Caddy, director of university ministries and missions at Southwest Baptist University, believes that will become more common.

"The world is kind of a changed place since 9-11. It's impacted things we do," he said.

The Bolivar college sends students on short mission trips. One group just returned from Egypt. Although there were some concerns, the group was treated well, Caddy said."They were loved and appreciated, because they were Americans. People apologized to them for the 9-11 thing," he said.

Turnage said she is not aware of any connection between the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the arrests in Belgium. Belgian authorities gave few details. The Interior Ministry, Brussels prosecutor's office and federal police declined to comment. A U.S.Embassy official in Brussels said he was looking into the incident.

Back to the Table of Contents

Hare Krishna in the eye of the cyclone : a storm in a teacup

By Willy Fautr, Human Rights Without Frontiers

HRWF (22.01.2002) C Website http://www.hrwf.net C Email info@hrwf.net - For three weeks, Hare Krishna (1) has been in the eye of the media cyclone triggered by a small local conflict with the neighbours of their centre located in a tourist area of the French-speaking part of Belgium. Through dialogue with the local authorities and population, the problem is however being settled.

The Hare Krishna community

The Hare Krishna community occupies a castle in Petite-Somme, a village situated on a 47 hectare plot of land in a woody region (the Ardennes) much frequented by Dutch and Flemish tourists. In the early 1980s, the Hare Krishna bought the castle (about 430,000 Euros) which at that time was in a very poor state. Since then, they have been renovating it and have added a cafeteria, a vegetarian restaurant, a shop, a bakery and other residential buildings in the local architectural style (stones) for the 35-40 followers (single) who are long-standing residents. About the same number of followers (usually married couples) live in the neighbourhood. Two thirds of the castle residents are Dutch-speaking (from the Flanders or the Netherlands), 25% come from France and 15% are from Central and East European countries.

Their castle is open to the public and is visited every year by about 35,000 tourists (80-90% Flemish and Dutch), which caused some disturbance to the local residents. Inside, there is much more tourist and religious documentation in Dutch than in French. Because of the intense anti-sect campaigns in the French-speaking media, French-speaking tourist agencies are reluctant to publicize the tourist activities organized at the Hare Krishna castle. The tourism activities provide for about 75% of the budget of the community.

The facts

The starting point of the local conflict was an application for a building permit for a 400 m2 library to be built on the other side of the road on a small plot of land they had bought. The building was meant to accommodate thousands of religious books, reading rooms, meeting rooms, five classrooms, offices and 25 students flats. In conformity with the normal rules, a public inquiry procedure was opened by the local municipal authorities. In that framework, the closest neighbours of the Hare Krishna community expressed their opposition to the project claiming that their daily life would be disturbed by an increase in visitors and road traffic. In their first statement, they said that they were not prejudiced against that eastern religion but they wanted to go on living in a quiet village. Very soon after the first alarming press article, the Hare Krishna leaders attended a meeting held by some local residents to explain their project and said they wanted to remain on good terms with them. They promised to choose another site on their own property, to build their own parking and their own connection to another major road. Despite the good will on both sides and on the side of the local authorities, this local problem became a national (and even international) issue in the media.

The sociological structure of the village

Nothing has been said about the sociological profile of the village. Human Rights Without Frontiers visited the area on 18 January and interviewed a number of people. In Petite-Somme, within one-kilometre radius around the Hare Krishna castle, there are about 120 houses. A first evaluation seems to indicate that 25% of them are occupied by natives while most of them were bought or built by non-Hare Krishna Flemish and Dutch people who use them as a second residence for the weekend and the holidays. When a petition against the building project was organized, outsiders were not approached but it was mainly signed by native residents and non-residents from other towns and villages.

The media coverage

The headlines of the written press were very suggestive although the content was less alarming: Hare Krishna knocks out Petite-Somme (2), Local residents are afraid of a Krishna library, The invaders: Near Durbuy (3), the villagers are alarmed by the building projects of the followers of the Hare Krishna sect, Radhadesh proposes solutions, Petite-Somme: Meeting between the population and the Krishna followers, Krishna in the Namurois (4): the sect already occupies a castle and goes on expanding, We are surrounded by Hare Krishnas, Durbuy fears expansion projects of a sect, We are victims of the French sect-hunt, Septon (5) afraid of the Krishna projects - Dangerous or just different? - A smiling dictatorship, A village in the grip of Krishnas? C The application is withdrawn.

There were also regular reports on all the Belgian TV channels and on the radio.

The sources of information of journalists were mainly the Hare Krishna leaders, spokespeople of some French-speaking anti-sect movements (6) - ADIF (Association for the Defence of Individuals and Families) and AVCS (Aid to the Victims of Sectarian Behaviours) - some local residents and the Information and Advice Centre on Harmful Sectarian Organizations. No Belgian academic was interviewed although it is known that Dr. Winand M. Callewaert, Professor at the Department of Asian Studies at the Catholic University of Leuven (KUL) (7), is a specialist on Hinduism.

In an interview with the main French-speaking Catholic newspaper La Libre Belgique (9 January), the director of the Centre said No recent data allow us to draw negative conclusions and there is nothing relevant as far as sectarian behaviours are concerned. On the same day, at 6.45 p.m., the vice-president of the Centre, Mr Henri de Cordes (8), declared on the main French-speaking TV channel RTBF The practice of repeating mantras is known in psychology as a technique that allows access to semi trance states that allow in certain cases a greater control of the individual by the leaders of the movements. Beyond Radhadesh shop window open to the public, the movement has a whole network of property, insurance and computer companies.

The Hare Krishna leaders told Human Rights Without Frontiers they did not recognize themselves at all in this portrait of their movement.

• (1) There are about 150 C 200 Hare Krishna followers in Belgium. Most of them are Dutch-speaking. In Antwerp (Dutch-speaking part of Belgium), they number about 20 and have their own temple. The Antwerp municipality grants them about 2,500 Euros every year for their free vegetarian food delivery service to the homeless and the people in dire need.
• (2) Petite-Somme is the name of the village.
• (3) Durbuy is the name of the closest town.
• (4) The Namurois is the name of a region.
• (5) Septon is the name of a nearby village.
• (6) ADIF spokeswoman is Mrs Julia Nyssens, doctor in law and deputy member of the Information and Advice Centre. AVCS was created by former Jehovahs Witnesses and was patroned by Mr. Duquesne before his becoming Minister of Interior.
• (7) KUL is a Dutch-speaking university.
• (8) Former secretary of the current Minister of Interior, Mr Duquesne, whose constituency includes the village of Petite-Somme.

Back to the Table of Contents

Hare Krishna treated as a harmful sectarian organization

By Willy Fautr, Human Rights Without Frontiers

HRWF (08.01.2002) C Website http://www.hrwf.net C Email info@hrwf.net - Since the publication of the parliamentary report on sects in 1997 and of an annexed list of movements suspected to be harmful sects, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) has been treated by some public authorities and private institutions as a dangerous movement. As far as the Hare Krishna movement is concerned, the parliamentary commission on sects heard the testimonies of three members of the same anti-sect organisation VVPG (Vereniging ter verdediging van persoon en gezin/ Association for the Defence of the Person and the Family). Professor Van den Wyngaert, founder the VVPG, was listed in the category "Representatives of the academic world". Mrs M. Degrieck was identified as a sociologist of the VVPG and Mr. L. De Droogh as the vice-president (1).

By the end of 2001, the "Information and Advice Centre on harmful sectarian movements" had not been asked by a public authority if they consider the ISKCON a harmful sectarian organization.

Food delivery to people in need banned by the mayor of Lige

On 13 November 2001, the mayor of Lige Willy Demeyer (Socialist Party) banned the free