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

[cricket246]

What does that mean "The conclusions to which the experts come are that from the legal point of view, local religious organizations can not be attributed to the structural subdivision of centralized organizations.? I am a bit dense this morning

[Omoyeme]

17:20

Representative Novakov selectively draws the attention of the court to the case materials in the 38th and 39th volumes of the case. The documents testify to false accusations of "extremism" against Jehovah's Witnesses. For example, there are a number of documents in the case in which people who "witnessed" against believers report that they gave their testimony against believers under the pressure of law enforcement officers, without warning of responsibility for deliberately false denunciation.

 

17:27	The court passes to the debate. The first is Zhenkov.

 

17:30

Zhenkov: A lot of people outside the walls of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and millions of citizens around the world will judge today the entire justice system in modern Russia - about its justice, its impartiality, and its independence from any influential people and state bodies. Why? Because organizations are judged today, belonging to a religion known throughout the world. This religion is known for the fact that its followers are striving to live according to the commandments of Jesus Christ, set forth in the Bible. They under no circumstances take up arms, do not interfere in politics, do not set the goal of overthrowing state power, try to show love to all people, regardless of their religion, nationality, or social status. They are alien to everything that in the Law on Counteracting Extremist Activity is called extremism.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[DinaG.]

2 minutes ago, cricket246 said:

What does that mean "The conclusions to which the experts come are that from the legal point of view, local religious organizations can not be attributed to the structural subdivision of centralized organizations.? I am a bit dense this morning

Experts come to conclusion that under the law local religious organizations can’t be considered as structural subdivisions of centralized organizations.

 

 

[Araujo JW]

4 minutes ago, Omo_Yeme said:

17:20

Representative Novakov selectively draws the attention of the court to the case materials in the 38th and 39th volumes of the case. The documents testify to false accusations of "extremism" against Jehovah's Witnesses. For example, there are a number of documents in the case in which people who "witnessed" against believers report that they gave their testimony against believers under the pressure of law enforcement officers, without warning of responsibility for deliberately false denunciation.

 

17:27	The court passes to the debate. The first is Zhenkov.

 

 

Wow! 

[Omoyeme]

 

17:31  /  17:33   / 17:35

 

	Attorney Zhenkov: All civilized countries of the world are struggling with extremism, because they understand the essence of this phenomenon and its danger. But in no other country in the world Jehovah's Witnesses are equated with extremists. And Jehovah's Witnesses around the world profess the same creed based on the Bible. In any country in the world, these Christians worship God Jehovah, in any country in the world, Jesus Christ, who did good only, exemplifies them. For Jehovah's Witnesses in any country in the world, the source of wisdom is the same Bible. Therefore, if extremism were manifested in their behavior, words and deeds, then this would be seen on a world scale. But Jehovah's Witnesses around the world have no reputation for extremism. And in our country they do not have such a reputation.
	Attorney Zhenkov: Yes, in our country people have different impressions about Jehovah's Witnesses, however, as well as representatives of other religions. God Himself gave people freedom of choice. And according to our legislation, we are obliged to respect the choice of another person. Someone may not understand why Jehovah's Witnesses adhere to the biblical norms of morality so strictly. Someone may not like their active preaching. Some may disagree with how Jehovah's Witnesses understand the Bible. But none of the citizens of Jehovah's Witnesses are associated with extremists. The history of Jehovah's Witnesses has proved that the extremism and convictions of Jehovah's Witnesses are completely incompatible concepts.
	Lawyer Zhenkov: Why then did the court of first instance on April 20, 2017 adopt such an unprecedented decision for modern Russia - forbade the existence of all legal entities of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia at once, and there were 396 of them? One reason is the incorrect application of anti-extremist legislation. Even the respected representative of the Ministry today incorrectly quoted the law: "the superiority of one religion over another." In fact, the law does not. There is propaganda of man's superiority over man on the basis of religion.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Omoyeme]

17:38 / 17:39 / 17:40 / 17:42

 

	Attorney Zhenkov: I already spoke in the court of first instance, and I want to repeat here that this happened only once in the history of our state - soon after the October Revolution. In 1918, on the basis of the decree of the Council of People's Commissars, all religious organizations were deprived of the rights of legal entities, all Orthodox churches and all property of religious organizations were confiscated. The state acknowledged these actions as its mistake. But for some reason now, in 100 years, the court of first instance repeats this mistake, but now it's against Jehovah's Witnesses.
	Attorney Zhenkov: The fact of rehabilitation of thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses in our country as victims of political repression shows that judicial mistakes in the past were very expensive for millions of innocent citizens of our country. You, the esteemed court, have both the opportunity and the authority to correct a judicial error today by canceling the decision of the court of first instance.
	Attorney Zhenkov: How can a court decision that eliminates 395 local religious organizations without their participation be legal, even without giving them the opportunity to be heard and defend themselves in court? How can it be legal to recognize as extremist those legal entities in whose actions there are no signs of extremism? Is it possible to be a legal solution, the consequences of which result in acts of violence, vandalism, hatred towards people who were tolerated only recently, but now with hatred only because they are outlawed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation?
	Summarizing the speech in the debate, lawyer Zhenkov: "Of course, each of us has the right to have his point of view with respect to any religious faith and religion in general. But no one has the right to use the law to prosecute dissenters. This persecution for the faith can now either be stopped by reversing the decision of the court of first instance, or ignited, if left in force. And let your conscience, dear judges, tell you how to act properly. "

[Canticles]

Word!!!

Sent from my itel it1506 using Tapatalk

[Friends just call me Ross]

The waiting is killing me.  

Need to pray for patience for me...and endurance for our brothers

and sisters in Russia.

This exercise also helps me to chill out:

 

 

[cricket246]

Not the ball is in their court and it's their turn to make a decision...

[Omoyeme]

17:43 / 17:45 / 17:47 / 17:48

 

	Representative of Axes: What does common sense tell us? It is clear that if you are tried, then you have the right to at least participate in this court, to defend yourself by all legal means. And otherwise it turns out as in the Russian folk proverb: "Without me they married me." Finally, what does your conscience tell you? And the conscience says that any court without involving someone judged and wanting to liquidate is an unfair trial. Jesus Christ judged and condemned the Sanhedrin - the Jewish supreme court. It was an unfair trial. Illegal. But even he did not dare to judge Jesus without his participation. And the court of first instance decided to do so.
	Representative of the Axes: We have before us the decision of the first instance court to liquidate the Administrative Center and 395 other legal entities - local religious organizations of Jehovah's Witnesses. But none of the local religious organizations was involved in the case, did not act either as a defendant or as an interested person. Are you familiar with these decisions of the courts? I have never met in my practice. Even associations that are not legal entities, if the issue is resolved in court to prohibit their activities, the law obliges to search for different addresses, publish information about the court case on official websites of courts and state bodies. For what? To ensure such a union of citizens the right to judicial protection. And we have 395 state-registered legal entities. Moreover, all of them have submitted official statements to the court on joining the case. However, all their applications, and then appeals to enter the case and defend themselves, defend their good name, defend their right to exist, were rejected by the court of first instance with one duty wording: "your rights are not affected"! How can this be understood? Their rights are "not affected", but they are liquidated by the court, recognized as extremist, their activities are prohibited, but "the rights are not affected". Where is justice here? Legality? Conscience? Such a decision of the court can neither be understood nor accepted. But this monstrous mistake can still be corrected. And you, dear court, can do it today.
	Representative of the Axes: The extremism of Jehovah's Witnesses continues to be extremism on paper, drawn by extremism, virtual, far-fetched. This raises legitimate questions: is extremism without consequences? Could it be that someone is carrying out extremist activities, and there are no victims, no consequences? Can there be extremism in the form of inaction? The court of first instance believes that it can. Legislation of Russia and common sense suggest the opposite.
	The representative of the Axes: You, the respected court, you, here and now, can eliminate this injustice and dishonesty towards hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens, restore their good name, strengthen confidence in the law on countering extremism, clearly showing the difference between real extremists and extremists, Drawn on paper. We hope that the court will have the courage to do this and make a fair and impartial decision, guided by the law and the gift from God - a human conscience.

 

 

[Canticles]

The Spirit of your Father is speaking through you!

O' Jehovah .... Serious words

Sent from my itel it1506 using Tapatalk

[TRUTH04]

Experts come to conclusion that under the law local religious organizations can’t be considered as structural subdivisions of centralized organizations.

 
 

IMO, The administrative center (Branch) is different from the different congregations.

In other words, they are separate entities from the Branch (centralised organisation), they are not off-shoots from the centralised body.

That's IMO.

Sent from my TECNO DP7CPRO using Tapatalk

[cricket246]

They are literally fighting for their lives.... Things are really heating up...

[Dages]

17:50	Speech in the court debate representative Novakov. The representative concentrates on the analysis of the so-called "new facts" of extremist activity, which allegedly took place within a year after the warning was issued.These "facts" were clearly falsified.
17:54	The courts proceeded from the presumption of guilt of local religious organizations, Novakov notes. So, if there was a forbidden book in the liturgical buildings, the courts passed decisions solely on the assumption that the book belongs to the organization.

 

17:58

Novakov in his speech raises the question of whether the creed of Jehovah's Witnesses contains signs of extremism listed in the Federal Law "On Counteracting Extremist Activity," and calls for the implementation of extremist actions? Does the Management Center have as its goal the implementation of extremist activities?What is the purpose of the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses? Novakov shows that in this case there is not only the subjective aspect of the extremist activity of the Management Center (intent, purpose), but there is not even an objective side (sayings, motives, appeals, concrete actions).

Edited July 17, 2017 by Dages

[Omoyeme]

 

edit.
 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Omo_Yeme

[Canticles]

Matt 10:20

" for the ones speaking are not just you, but it is the spirit of your Father that speaks by you".

Sent from my itel it1506 using Tapatalk

[Dages]

18:03	Novakov: The plaintiff calls the extremists of peace-loving citizens. At one time, Hitler vowed to destroy Jehovah's Witnesses for refusing to manifest extremism, and the Justice Ministry today asks for a label of extremists on Jehovah's Witnesses. At the same time, the charges are humiliating Jehovah's Witnesses, because they accuse them of lying. We do not and can not have grounds to distrust members of local religious organizations of Jehovah's Witnesses who are brought to administrative responsibility who claim that they did not distribute extremist materials, but were victims of falsification. We believe Jehovah's Witnesses not only because they presented one hundred percent evidence of falsification, but also because they are moral people living in harmony with the biblical commandment: "In everything we want to behave honestly." Accusations of lying are degrading the human dignity of the Witnesses. Psychophysiological studies were conducted in relation to Jehovah's Witnesses. Studies have established: Jehovah's Witnesses speak the truth, which is quite natural for them.
18:07	Novakov: It follows from the arguments of the plaintiff that anyone who wishes, and this happens in large numbers, can come to the places where the services of Jehovah's Witnesses are held in Russia, ask for or take literature from the FEMC. But it's surprising that having such information, neither the FSB officers nor the CPE staff for some reason can provide documented evidence of such a transfer (on audio and video carriers). There are no hidden audio and video recordings that captured this, despite the fact that the police conducted the ORM and could have made a secret survey of the relevant facts, if they had been. In the court session, it was clarified that the administrative plaintiff had no evidence of objective fixation or other documented evidence of the transfer of literature from the FEMC by Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, on video carriers.
18:09	Novakov: However, the Management Center is ready to provide a lot of documented and documented evidence to the contrary. The attack on Jehovah's Witnesses in the form of recognition of their religious associations as extremist is completely unfair. Therefore, we ask the court to make a fair appellate ruling in the case: to prevent the "judicial murder" of the right to freedom of conscience and religion for hundreds of thousands of believing Russian citizens.
18:11	The final speech in the debate advocates Omelchenko. Lawyer Omelchenko: Dear court! Dear participants of the process! Speaking on this case, I repeatedly turned to authoritative sources of law. Supporting my position, I pointed out that the requirements of the Ministry of Justice of Russia violate the Basic Law of the Russian Federation, the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
18:13	Lawyer Omelchenko: But I also want to draw attention to the existence of a law that is higher than this. In democratic countries, this law is given a special place. So part of the modern legal doctrine of Anglo-American law for almost three hundred years is the postulate of William Blackstone: "This law of nature, which is a peer of mankind and dictated by God himself, certainly surpasses all others in compulsory execution. It is indispensable everywhere on earth, in all countries and at all times: if human laws contradict it, they lose power. " In addition to the law of nature - the unwritten law of God, there is also the "law of revelation" God's law recorded in the Bible: "On these two pillars, on the law of nature and the law of revelation, all human laws are based; That is, we must not allow human laws to contradict them. "
18:14	Lawyer Omelchenko: The need to obey the natural law, history shows, can be forgotten by persons with power in totalitarian states. For example, in Nazi Germany, many officials believed that they simply carried out the law of their country. This is the position they took at the Nuremberg Trials. However, the tribunal proceeded from the general duty of each person to obey the natural law, the law of humanity, the law of conscience. This law is a fundamental source of international law. But since it was forgotten in Nazi Germany, it had to be reminded with the help of principles - the Nuremberg Principles. The first: "Any person who committed an act recognized as a crime under international law is liable for him and is liable to punishment."The second: "The fact that under domestic law there is no punishment for an act recognized by international law as a crime does not absolve the person who committed this act from responsibility under international law". At the same time, principle VI refers to crimes against humanity the extermination and other inhuman acts committed against the civilian population, or persecution for political or religious reasons.
18:15	Lawyer Omelchenko: Obviously, in the current process without resorting to natural law, it is impossible to make a legal and fair decision, because even the best laws need to be correctly applied. First, as my colleagues have shown and with what the administrative plaintiff agrees, the persecution of religious associations of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia is due to the fact that they, as true teachings, distribute the laws of God recorded in the Bible among the inhabitants of Russia. Earlier I showed that such behavior is a simple realization of the rights to freedom of religion, freedom of opinion, freedom of association guaranteed by articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Convention and the International Covenant. But you will agree that from the standpoint of the right of the natural it is inconceivable to justify the persecution of a person propagandizing the need to live by the principle: "Love your neighbor as yourself", even if he claims that he categorically disagrees with all who do not consider this to be true.

[Friends just call me Ross]

This was how the 'scales of justice' were tipped the last time:

 

Only Jehovah can tip the scales back in favor of justice.

Our Russian brothers and sisters may have to wait until Jehovah's Day

to see Him do it.

 

[Dages]

18:16	Lawyer Omelchenko: Secondly, it is necessary to recognize that the task of this legal proceeding is not the final decision of the issue of Jehovah's Witnesses, but as well as any other administrative proceedings - protection of violated or contested rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens, rights and legitimate interests of organizations. The need to ensure the realization of the right to a fair trial. But does not justice itself mean that religious associations can not be liquidated without giving them effective protection? Should not they be allowed to express themselves in their defense to those believers who suddenly were deprived of places of worship and rights to establish new religious organizations, although they did not violate any law and did only good to their neighbors? I am convinced that the respected court can not agree that 395 local religious organizations are not even heard in court and were liquidated without their participation.
18:18	Lawyer Omelchenko: Thirdly, the organization I represent before the court appeals to the respected court for protection against inhuman and degrading treatment, discrimination and political repression. As a lawyer, I argued that such an appeal is inadmissible from the position of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Convention. But now is the time to understand that the administrative plaintiff calls for committing inhuman acts against the civilian population - Jehovah's Witnesses, their persecution for political and religious reasons.And the most ardent detractors sincerely hope that after the Supreme Court decision comes into force, Jehovah's Witnesses will no longer be in Russia, that is, they think that the faithful of this peaceful confession will be exterminated.
18:19	Attorney Omelchenko: Who can prevent the commission of this crime against humanity? You, dear court.Considering the foregoing, I ask the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of April 20, 2017 to repeal completely and to adopt a new decision on the case, in which the administration's claim to the Ministry of Justice of Russia is refused.

[Omoyeme]

I relinquish the "baton" to you my brother.  

[Skye]

5 minutes ago, Omo_Yeme said:

I relinquish the "baton" to you my brother.  

Thank you SO SO SO much, Sandra! You have done this job so faithfully! I appreciate the hardwork, time and energy and love that you put into it.

[Dages]

Thanks, I'll do my best.

 

18:20	In the closing speech, the representative Kalin thanks the court for attention and asks for a fair decision.
18:21	The floor for the debate was given to Borisova, the representative of the plaintiff.
18:22	Borisova: the offense "carries a dangerous, systematic, willful and rude character."
18:24	Borisova quotes from the state strategy of countering extremism. He asks to refuse to satisfy the appellate complaint, and leave the decision of the first instance unchanged.
18:27	The court is removed to the advisory room for a final decision.

[JW-Ind]

From Anton Chivchalov's tweets

 

"It's unlawful and unfair to judge anybody without their presence"

 

"Jesus was judged unfairly, illegaly, but even the Sanhedrin didn't dare to judge him without his presense"

 

"Hitler vowed to destroy JWs for their refusal to become extremists, and MOJ today wants to label JWs as extremists"

 

"Isn't it strange that FSB failed to provide any evidence or recordings of any Witness giving anybody any extremist literature"?

 

"There are law of nature dictated by God and law of revelation, they are higher than eveything else", quotes William Blackstone

 

"The natural law finds absurd to persecute someone for teaching to "love neighbor as yourself" even if he thinks others are wrong"

 

"And both court and MOJ agree that JWs are persecuted for teaching Russian citizens their Bible-based beliefs"

 

 

 

 

 

[Dages]

It's a good time to pray...
 

[Friends just call me Ross]

Wow!  What an amazing legal and logical set of closing arguments!

All of the months and months of effort our lawyers have put into these 

unlawful proceedings...and the tremendous strain this must have put upon them.

I applaud Jehovah for backing our brothers who are backing our brothers!!!