DISCUSS COURT CASE HERE JW.org - Jehovah’s Witnesses Mobilize Global Response to Threat of Ban in Russia

[Omoyeme]

Quote

One of these events, either tonight, or another to come will be the threshold of a new dawning. Whether we must condtinue in prayer and endurance, or there is a vindication for Jehovah's people makes no difference to the eventual outcome of Jehovah's victory, in his time.

 

In the meantime it is my prayer to our God and Father, that our brothers and sisters not only remain faithful,but joyful in their service, and through them doing may we also draw strength from their examples to endure things to come for us.

 

Amen Mandi!...Amen! 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Margaret]

Hey the "breaking news feature" is missing now

[Omoyeme]

July 17, 2017

9:30a

	On Moscow's Arbat District, where the Supreme Court of Russia, go dark clouds. At the entrance to the courthouse gathered a large group of citizens, their number is closer to 150. Those who stand in the queue, came to the entrance at 4am. Noticeable journalists armed with shooting equipment. Moscow police to ensure public order.

10:00a

	To hear once again provided the largest meeting room. On the faces of the court employees solemn expression, everyone is trying to flawlessly perform their duties. In the hall I heard a discreet hum.

10:05a

 

	In the courtroom, sounds foreign speech: there is quite a lot of foreign observers, the majority are Jehovah's Witnesses in different countries. Also have observers who arrived at the courthouse with diplomatic plates on cars.

 

(If there is a better Russian/English translation than Google, please utilize, thanks).

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Cool Cat]

Heres the link https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fjw-russia.org

 

Just tap on "report from the courtroom" for live updates

Edited July 17, 2017 by MentalProject

[Omoyeme]

11:10 am	Silence reigned in the hall, the parties and observers are waiting for the judges to appear.

***Tapping feet.***

 

 

11:11am

The courtroom includes judges who will listen to the case. By announcing the case, they determine who represents the parties. In addition to Kalina, Zhenkov, Omelchenko and Novakova, the lawyer Yury Toporov represents the side of the administrative defendant. The members of the judiciary are Judges Manohina Galina Vladimirovna (Chairman), Zaitsev Vladimir Y. and Popov Vladimir Valentinovich. Neither of the parties has a reason to claim to one of the judges a challenge.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Omoyeme]

11:17a

After the introductory words, the lawyer Omelchenko declares a petition to postpone the consideration of this case until a decision is made on numerous private complaints that are accepted for production by the Appeals Board of the Supreme Court. The lawyer explains that the court's decision of April 20 filed numerous complaints from individuals who in detail justified that their rights and interests had been affected by the decision, and therefore they had to be involved in the case. The fact that they did not have the opportunity to participate in the case, in itself, indicates that the decision should be automatically revoked. However, all these complaints were returned without any analysis of the arguments cited. The court only reported that "the disputed judicial act did not resolve the issue of their rights and obligations." In response, citizens filed private complaints, but contrary to all logic, the court intends to consider them after the final decision on the case has been rendered. That is why the lawyer asks to postpone the hearing until the full composition of the participants in the proceedings has been determined on the appellate appeal of the decision.

[Omoyeme]

11:17a

After the introductory words, the lawyer Omelchenko declares a petition to postpone the consideration of this case until a decision is made on numerous private complaints that are accepted for production by the Appeals Board of the Supreme Court. The lawyer explains that the court's decision of April 20 filed numerous complaints from individuals who in detail justified that their rights and interests had been affected by the decision, and therefore they had to be involved in the case. The fact that they did not have the opportunity to participate in the case, in itself, indicates that the decision should be automatically revoked. However, all these complaints were returned without any analysis of the arguments cited. The court only reported that "the disputed judicial act did not resolve the issue of their rights and obligations." In response, citizens filed private complaints, but contrary to all logic, the court intends to consider them after the final decision on the case has been rendered. That is why the lawyer asks to postpone the hearing until the full composition of the participants in the proceedings has been determined on the appellate appeal of the decision.

 

11:22a

Lawyer Omelchenko declares a petition for interrogation as witnesses of rehabilitated citizens from among Jehovah's Witnesses. The trial court refused to question them. Contrary to its promise, the court did not properly investigate the circumstances of political repression against Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia, for example, ignored the question of what actions of state authorities have already been recognized as political repressions, and did not check whether these actions continue to be committed against the Witnesses Jehovah is now.

11:28a

 

Lawyer Omelchenko continues to intercede for the interrogation of witnesses Pavel Bezhenar and Anatoly Yasinsky. They are recognized victims of political repression as Jehovah's Witnesses. They know that the prohibition of religious organizations causes severe and unjustified persecution of believers of this religion. Thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses lost their property in April 1951 and were expelled in freight cars from the western regions of the USSR to an eternal settlement in Siberia, later they were searched, confiscated, discriminated against and imprisoned only because they lived according to the Bible's commandments. Bezhenar, for example, is aware of the information that in 1951 he and members of his family were deported from Moldova to the Tomsk region. Later he was twice convicted and spent 8 years in prison because he followed the commandments of Christ: "Return your sword to his place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword". Due to discrimination, he had to change his place six times. In 1982, he faced a search and confiscation of religious literature. Recognizing these people as victims of political repression, the state condemned "the long-standing terror unleashed by the Bolshevik party-Soviet regime against priests and believers of all faiths," and also committed itself to "seek real guarantees of law and human rights." In fact, the state promised to do so that it did not happen again what they faced.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Jahleadsme]

Hey the "breaking news feature" is missing now

The breaking news feature will come back at the end of the court case today.

Sent from my TECNO_P5_PLUS using Tapatalk

[Omoyeme]

11:31a

 

	Representative Novakov makes a petition for interrogation of eyewitnesses of throws of extremist literature and other falsifications that were organized or used by law enforcement agencies, for those cases on which the Ministry of Justice bases its claim. Witnesses appeared in the courtroom and are ready to give testimony.

[Jahleadsme]

I have complete faith that we're gonna hear a good news today. If otherwise, we are still confident that Jehovah has all matters in hand....

But, I want to ask, can this appeal case be adjourned just as it was being done on the previous cases.

Sent from my TECNO_P5_PLUS using Tapatalk

[Lance]

The lawyers wouldn't ask unless it was possible 

[Beggar for the Spirit]

Hi David,

Yes I think it could be adjourned.

For example, if you look at our lawyers first request, they asked for a postponement in order to wait for the decisions of lower courts to decide on the individual cases of JWs.  But the court refused.

 

However, if this Appeal Court accepts just 1 of our requests for appeal, then maybe this would cause a postponement or adjournment until a later date in order for both sides to prepare . But so far it is not looking good as the Court is rejecting all of our petitions.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Beggar for the Spirit

[rbrown1205]

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://jw-russia.org/faq/3.html&usg=ALkJrhgvBPrpkIBDwgL2V9CWk7QllqaVvA

 

This is the article posted in January on the site giving 4 reasons why JWs are not extremists.  Clear, sensible, documented logic.

[Omoyeme]

11:40a

 

	Novakov said that four witnesses appeared in the courtroom. The court, without making any determinations on the applications submitted, asks if there are any more motions. Novakov petitioned to call in the courtroom 53 more witnesses of fraud.

11:45a

 

Lawyer Omelchenko declares an extensive petition to reclaim evidence from the courts, referred to by the Ministry of Justice, trying to prove "extremism" among Jehovah's Witnesses. A similar petition was filed in the court of first instance, but the court refused to grant it. Therefore, the defendant asks the court of appeal, after all, to obtain from the courts those materials of Jehovah's Witnesses who were considered "extremist". After all, judgments in themselves do not have a prejudicial significance for this case, as the court of first instance admitted, because the Management Center did not participate in the examination.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Beggar for the Spirit]

Sister Sandra is our inside "Court Reporter" 

[M&M]

1 hour ago, MentalProject said:

Heres the link https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fjw-russia.org

 

Just tap on "report from the courtroom" for live updates

 

Thanks MentalProject. I was wondering where Sandra was getting it.

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://jw-russia.org/pages/17071316-192.html&usg=ALkJrhicKyfQoGIKMEiQQ7PL2vZ6PF4fLw

[Omoyeme]

11:50a  /  11:55a

 

Lawyer Omelchenko recalls that the law obliges the court to directly investigate all the evidence. For example, given the gravity of the case for freedom of religion throughout the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court should directly examine the reasons for the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses to be extremist and whether these grounds are sufficient to meet the requirements of the Ministry of Justice of Russia. The court could make sure that in the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses there are no signs of inciting hatred or enmity as defined by the Plenum of the Supreme Court in its decision of June 28, 2011. No court has established another! (According to the Plenum, hate speech and enmity means statements that justify the need for genocide, repression, deportations, violence against members of a nation, race or religion.) As the Plenum emphasized, even criticism of religious beliefs or religious customs should not be viewed as extremism.)

Continuing to talk about the need to claim evidence, the lawyer recalls that, in accordance with the new reservation in the law on counteracting extremist activities, the Bible and quotations from it can not be recognized as extremist materials. Demanding evidence, the court can make sure that the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses is always based on the Bible, encourages people to love God and love their neighbors and strengthens faith in the Bible. This all means that the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses is recognized as "extremist" by misunderstanding and, in any case, can not serve as a basis for banning an entire religion with hundreds of thousands of adherents in Russia.

[booboo]

Thanks for the link. May Jehovahs will be done.

[Beggar for the Spirit]

(11:45am Layman's Report)

I think what is happening is that our lawyers have given a large petition to this court asking to provide each of the various evidence that the Russian Ministry of Justice in the original hearings stated were the reasons that JWs were "extremists" under the law. We were never allowed to review all of the supposed "evidence" back then and to be able to give a defense for each accusation or so called evidence. So now our lawyers are asking the Court of Appeals again to see this evidence! And this is another valid reason for granting an appeal since this was a judicial error in the original hearings.

[Daniela]

Our lawyers started in force. Whatever the outcome, a great witness is being done... to the highest level. ..

[Beggar for the Spirit]

(11:55am Layman's Chart)

Great logic by our lawyers, I put this into a logic chart in my own words

 

Our Lawyers

"An Appeal must be granted because there is a law that states that quotations of the Bible will not be considered extremist"

            I

            I

"And all of our literature is based on the Bible, full of quotations from the Bible"

            I

            I

"So all of the literature that the Ministry of Justice(MOJ) claimed was "extremist" literature was

   bad evidence, the MOJ has completely misapplied the law"

            I

            I

"Therefore we must be granted an appeal based on this serious error!" 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Beggar for the Spirit

[Omoyeme]

11:59	Not allowing the previous petitions, the court invites lawyer Zhenkov to read his petitions.

Noon

Zhenkov intercedes for interrogation of experts (religious scholars, linguists). In the court of first instance, the court unreasonably denied this. Meanwhile, explanations of experts are necessary for the adoption of a legitimate and informed decision. Thus, a specialist in the field of religious studies could clarify the concepts specific to Christianity, which are used in the charter of a religious organization, and also how the stated goals and tasks of Jehovah's Witnesses are realized by them in practice. What is important, the religious scholar could clarify whether the belief in the truth of his religion is peculiar only to Jehovah's Witnesses or whether it is a characteristic feature of any religion.

12:03p

	The participation of a linguistic specialist is necessary because all accusations of extremism against Jehovah's Witnesses are not taken from real life or established offenses, but are only taken from their liturgical texts. The analysis of texts is done by linguists.

12:04p

	Females declare one more petition - the inclusion of new evidence. We are talking about the events that took place after the decision of April 20 - acts of vandalism and other offenses provoked by the decision. These events are imprinted on the video, and Zhenkov intercedes for their viewing in the courtroom.

12:07p

As there are no more petitions, the court suggests the representative of the Ministry of Justice to express his opinion. The representative of the Ministry of Justice objects to the adjournment of the hearing, against videotaping, against questioning of witnesses - citizens of victims of political repression. In addition, the Ministry of Justice against the questioning of witnesses of fraud, against the demand for evidence from the courts. The representative of the Ministry of Justice believes that the petitions are aimed at reviewing the court decisions that came into force, which, in his opinion, is unacceptable. The representative of the Ministry of Justice considers video with facts of violation of the rights of citizens an indisputable proof.

 

12:15	The court declares a break for the meeting on the petitions submitted.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Omoyeme]

Oh! To be a fly on the wall...

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Beggar for the Spirit]

I might be misunderstanding this, but at 11:59am the court asked for the rest of our petitions to be read. Why would they ask for us to read all of the rest of our petitions instead of listening and reviewing each petition 1 at a time?

It seems like the Court is saying,

"Look, we have rejected each of your petitions so far, just read the rest of your petitions to us all at once instead of 1 at a time so we can just reject all of them together and not waste any more of this Court's time"  

Edited July 17, 2017 by Beggar for the Spirit

[M&M]

4 minutes ago, Beggar for the Spirit said:

I might be misunderstanding this, but at 11:59am the court asked for the rest of our petitions to be read. Why would they ask for us to read all of the rest of our petitions instead of listening and reviewing to each petition 1 at a time?

It seems like the Court is saying,

"Look, we have rejected each of your petitions so far, just read the rest of your petitions to us all at once instead of 1 at a time so we can just reject all of them together and not waste any more of this Court's time"  

 

Can you say: Kangaroo Court?

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/kangaroo-court.html

Kangaroo courts are sham legal proceedings which are set-up in order to give the impression of a fair legal process. In fact, they offer no impartial justice as the verdict, invariably to the detriment of the accused, is decided in advance.  ...

Edited July 17, 2017 by M&M
Link