Sofia, 08/11/2000 - In September 2000 the final version of the draft Denominations Act, prepared by the Parliamentary Commission on Human Rights and Religions on the basis of the three previous drafts, became known. On October 12 2000, the text was submitted to Parliament for the second and final reading.

This was the reason for the conference, organised by the Tolerance Foundation in cooperation with the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and the Bulgarian Association for the Encouragement and Protection of Religious Freedoms on October 20 2000. The topic of the event was the critical examination of the final version of the draft. More than 60 representatives of almost all religious organisations took part in the conference. Mr. Lutfi Mestan and Mr. Ahmed Usein, MPs from the opposition party of the Turkish minority in Bulgaria, the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) were among the participants. The distinguished expert in the field Prof. W. Cole Durham Jr. from the United States, Ms. Karen Lord, Counsel for Freedom of Religion in the United States Helsinki Commission, and Mr. Lee Boothby, President of the International Association for Freedom of Conscience, also participated in the meeting. Mr. Durham and Mr. Boothby made presentations to the participants.

The conference made a critical discussion of the last version of the draft Denominations Act. Another draft law, entitled "Law on Religious Freedom and Religious Organisations", prepared by a team under the leadership of Mr. Mestan, was presented to the participants. It was submitted to Parliament on May 26 2000. Unfortunately, due to troubles created by the ruling parliamentary majority, the draft has not been discussed in the parliamentary commissions yet.

In their joint report delivered at the conference, Mr. Emil Cohen, President of the Tolerance Foundation, a nd Mr. Krassimir Kanev, Chair of the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee, stated that although the final version was in some aspects better than the previous ones, it reproduced all their shortcomings. They also stated, that on the whole the Draft was worse than the currently acting law, enacted in the beginning of the Communist regime. Their general conclusion was that most probably the Bulgarian draft Denominations Act was the worst in all Eastern Europe.

As it is well known, both the spirit and provisions of the previous drafts were strongly criticized at the meetings of religious and human rights activists organized by the Tolerance Foundation on July 8 and October 11 2000. They were also denounced in the Declaration of nineteen human rights and religious organizations from February 8 2000. However, the great majority of the members of the parliament have neglected all critical notes of the religious organizations. The situation can be summarized with the words of Mr. Ahmed Usein to the participants: "Unfortunately, it is obvious, that both the ruling majority and the main opposition party do not have the political will to adopt a real, democratic Denominations Act".

Finally, the conference participants adopted a special Address to the members of Bulgarian National Assembly. (The text of the address is given as an enclosure to this Press Release. The Address is still in the process of signing.)

*   *   *

In greater detail, the main shortcomings of the draft can be stated as follows:

• The draft gives far-reaching rights to the state body that will be especially created to provide for "the coordination of the State with the various religious faiths" (i.e. the "Directorate of Denominations"). This Directorate has a large number of rights. It gives to the Court opinions for the registration of the religious organizations. It also has the right to approve the creation of the schools for the training of all kinds of clergy and to approve the curricula of these schools. The Draft provides that the Directorate of Denominations "shall control the activities of the various faiths with reference to their compliance with their statutes and the provisions hereof". Moreover, the Directorate "shall investigate the religious basis and rites of the thus associated religious faith and shall issue an opinion on the registration of the same". This investigation should be made because the draft prohibits the court from granting registration to some religious organization if there is already a registered one with the same religious basis and/or with the same name. In other words, according to the provisions of the draft the splitting of already existing religious organizations is prohibited. Under this provision, the Directorate, a state authority, takes on itself the role of the judge in the theological discussions. It is clear that these rights of the specialized state body to control religious activities are discriminatory. They are formulated in an extremely vague way and thus create great possibilities for arbitrariness.
• The draft also creates a large number of preconditions for arbitrariness on the local level. It entitles the local authorities to control the branches of the religious organizations. The mayors have a right to refuse the registration of the local branches, "if the services and rites, which the local branch wishes to practice, do not comply with the Statutes of the registered religious faith". Every local association which wants to be registered as a local religious organization has to submit proof that its religious basis and rites are the same as the ones of some already registered in the capital institution. These provisions are a drastic violation of the religious human rights of the citizens, because they give possibilities for a very large discretion of the mayors to decide whether the local association is able or not able to exist legally. Without any doubts these provisions create a situation that is worse than the present situation under the present Denominations Act. There are also a number of very high problems connected to the possibilities for the restriction of the right of freedom of the religion in the draft. In addition to the grounds that are provided in international human rights law, the Bulgarian draft introduces certain others. For instance, such grounds are "the national security", or "the use of denominations for political purposes". These grounds for restriction are inadmissible, because according to the Constitution of Bulgaria, the international treaties (in which such grounds are not provided) that are ratified according to rules of it are part of the domestic law. Moreover, they have precedence over domestic law. Thus, these additional grounds for restriction are in contradiction to the requirements of the Constitution. There are also definitions of the restrictions in the draft. They are very unclear and give possibilities for serious human rights violations. For example, some religious institutions can be restricted if they "endanger the rights and freedoms of others in case the same advocates or includes in its practices any activities directed against the proclaimed and guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the Republic of Bulgaria rights and freedom of its citizens". Thus, the religious prohibition of abortions, a prescription of many faiths, can serve as a ground for restriction, because there is no prohibition of abortions in this country. Some of the definitions are manifestly ridiculous. For example, a religious institution can be restricted if it "is a threat to the morals in case the same advocates or includes in its practices any public activities, which are in deep non-compliance with the generally accepted rules of ethics for the current time and place". Thus, every religious faith can be declared a threat to the "current time and place" because everyone can easily find some statements of some religious system to be "in deep non-compliance with the generally accepted rules of ethics for the current time and place".
• The draft contains a number of other provisions which can strongly violate the rights of citizens. One of the heaviest is, for example, the prohibition for the religious organizations to use public buildings unless they have separate entrances. This provision can create many problems for a great number of small religious communities that do not have their own houses of prayer. They are forced to rent public buildings for their prayer's meetings. However, as a rule these buildings have only one entrance.

In the current situation the Tolerance Foundation believes that the international pressure upon Bulgarian politicians is most probably the only tool for changing in a positive direction the politics of the Bulgarian state toward the religious rights of the citizens.

* The TOLERANCE FOUNDATION is a human rights group monitoring the freedom of conscience and the religious freedom practices in Bulgaria, providing legal assistance to victims of discrimination based on religion, as well as propagating the idea of tolerance towards religious and other convictions.

The group was founded in 1994. Mr. Emil Cohen is President of the Tolerance Foundation.

Address: 1000 Sofia, 163A "Rakovsky" St., phone/fax: (+359 2) 981 23 57
Phone: (+359 2) 988 31 36
E-mail: toleranc@geobiz.com