Russia's Religion Law: Assessments and Implications

Russia's Religion Law: Assessments and Implications

97-696 F
Updated May 29, 1998
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Russia’s Religion Law:
Assessments and Implications
Jim Nichol
Analyst in Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs and National Defense Division
Summary
This short report provides an overview and assessment of the Russian religion law.
On September 26, 1997, Russian President Boris Yeltsin signed the religion bill into
law, and implementing regulations were promulgated in early 1998. The Administration
and Congress have raised concerns that the law may restrict religion and have urged
Russia to uphold its international commitments to religious freedom. The FY1998
Foreign Aid Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-118) prohibits Freedom Support Act aid to
Russia unless the President determines and certifies that the Russian government has
not discriminated against religious groups in violation of its international commitments.
The determination was released on May 26, 1998, finding that Russia has not violated
such commitments, but that U.S. officials would continue to monitor the situation.
Background
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, most people in Russia have
eschewed atheism and professed at least nominal adherence to a religious faith. Although
most Russians profess to be Russian Orthodox, there has been an explosive growth in
membership of other faiths, including those relatively new to Russia, and in the work of
foreign missionaries. Faced with this activity, the Russian Orthodox Church has been at
the forefront in lobbying the Russian government and legislature to impose restrictions
on what it widely defines as “false faiths.” Many hardliners, ultranationalists, and others
in Russia also have argued that many faiths and foreign missionaries threaten Russia’s
“traditional” cultural and religious values. Elements of the Russian government have
been sympathetic to these views. The Russian Ministry of Health issued a report warning
that there are 6,000 sects in Russia, and the ministry set up a service to aid “victims” of
these sects. The Interior Ministry (MVD), as part of its anticrime efforts, declared that
several sects were involved in criminal acts and would be closely monitored.
Passage of the Religion Bill. In the latest of several attempts to amend the existing,
relatively liberal, 1990 religious law, Communist deputy Viktor Zorkaltsev and the
government co-sponsored a bill “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Association”
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

CRS-2
which received its “first reading” (introduction) in July 1996. The bill was criticized by
Yeltsin in September 1996 as unconstitutional. The Committee on Affairs of Public
Associations and Religious Organizations, chaired by Zorkaltsev, continued work on the
bill, however, and in June 1997 reported it to the floor for its “second reading”
(substantive debate). Zorkaltsev stated that the bill, totally recast as a replacement to the
1990 law, would introduce state control over “pseudoreligious” and “destructive cults,”
which are “tearing the fabric of society.” The bill was quickly and overwhelmingly
approved by the legislature, but Yeltsin vetoed it on July 22, 1997, rather than sign it into
law. As he explained, the bill did not respect constitutional provisions prohibiting the
government from giving preferences to one faith or another, and did not accord with
Russia's international commitments. However, he also agreed that a strong law was
needed “to protect the moral and spiritual health of Russian citizens and put up secure
barriers against the infiltration of radical religious sects.” Zorkaltsev and some other
Duma leaders denounced Yeltsin’s veto as allowing Western influences to “trample on
Russia” and “brainwash the younger generation,” alluding to political and generational
divisions in Russia which also animated advocacy for the bill.
Advocates of the bill strongly urged Yeltsin to soften his objections. In talks
between Yeltsin and Orthodox Church Patriarch Alexey II on August 6, 1997, Yeltsin
reportedly agreed to support major provisions of the bill backed by the Patriarch. Andrey
Loginov, presidential advisor on domestic affairs and executive secretary of the
presidential Council on Relations with Religious Associations, played a primary role in
guiding the deliberations within the government. According to reports, at a meeting in
early September 1997, the Council managed to get several representatives of minority
faiths to sign a memorandum that Loginov represented later as indicating their support
for the presidential draft. However, the draft that reached Yeltsin did not take the
concerns of the Catholic, Pentecostal, Baptist, and Adventist emissaries into account,
according to a letter they later sent to Yeltsin. On September 4, 1997, Yeltsin approved
the draft and sent it to the legislature for its perusal. The bill had few substantive
changes from the earlier version he had vetoed. The State Duma overwhelmingly
approved the presidential draft with few changes, the Federation Council unanimously
followed suit, and the bill was signed into law by Yeltsin on September 26, 1997
Key Features. The main characteristics of the law are as follows. (Some
characteristics that raised initial Western concern appear to have been partly addressed
in an informal fashion during early implementation -- see below.)
C
It affirms the separation of church and state and freedom of religious opinion,
including nonbelief. The preamble mentions Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and
“Christianity” as part of Russia’s heritage. However, it also highlights "the special
role of Orthodoxy in the history of Russia and in the establishment and development
of its spirituality and culture.” Beyond mentioning “Christianity,” the preamble
does not cite other faiths long practiced in Russia, such as Roman Catholicism,
Baptism, or Pentecostalism.
C
The bill requires the registration of all religious associations by December 31, 1999,
by local and central offices of the Ministry of Justice. A congregation must register
at the local level. A faith that has congregations in two or more regions or republics,
which often occurs, must also register with the central Justice Ministry.

CRS-3
C
The bill affirms the 1990 law in distinguishing between “religious groups” and
“religious organizations,” but changes registration requirements and the rights of the
former. “Religious organizations” are those that have been registered by the Russian
government. In order to be registered, a group must prove that it has existed in
Russia for at least the past fifteen years. Groups existing for at least fifty years with
congregations registered in at least half of the 89 federal subunits, or if ethnically-
based, in at least three subunits, are accorded the special status of “All-Russian
religious organizations.”
C
If registration is denied, the rights of a religious association are circumscribed to
those allowed to “religious groups,” or it may even be banned by court order.
“Religious groups” may choose whether to inform the authorities about their
“formation and commencement of activity,” depending on whether they seek later
to become “religious organizations.” “Religious groups” are forbidden to own
property, publish religious literature, host foreign guests, set up schools, or carry out
charitable work, among other restrictions.
C
A change introduced by Yeltsin (Article 27(3)) permits religious associations that
cannot prove through “documentation” that they have existed for fifteen years in
Russia to appeal for provisional, yearly registration. If granted, they are allowed to
conduct charity work, but the law otherwise treats them as “religious groups”
prohibited from carrying out many activities.
C
Besides the requirement that a “religious organization” show that it has existed for
fifteen years, registration is dependent on governmental approval of the aims and
activities of the group. A group will not be registered if it does not abide by all
provisions of the constitution and laws or if its petition “contains information that
has not been confirmed” (does not reflect what the government views as the real
aims and activities of the group).
C
The new law allows a foreign “religious organization” to open offices in Russia
upon the approval of the authorities. However, they are forbidden to engage in any
“cultural and other religious activity.” If a Russian “religious organization” wishes
to sponsor a foreign group, it must provide the government with the charter and
confirmation of the group’s legality abroad, spell out the purpose of the group’s
activities in Russia, and disclose its beliefs, history, and practices.
Areas of Concern. Some features of the bill appear unobjectionable, including
provisions restating a Constitutional provision that alternative service be provided for
conscientious objectors, and proclaiming the protected status of the confessor-confessee
relationship. The bill also states that, if a religious association is denied registration, it
can appeal the decision in court. Once a “religious organization” is registered, it has legal
rights to own buildings, hold meetings, publish literature, run schools and businesses, and
carry out charitable work within the territory where it is recognized to operate.
On the other hand, religious rights concerns are heightened by vaguely written and
contradictory provisions that appear to greatly increase the role of the government in
regulating religious practice. The Keston Institute, a U.K.-based religious rights
organization, suggests that religious associations will be increasingly vulnerable to the
caprice and graft of central and local Russian bureaucrats. All religious associations

CRS-4
must report to the authorities, except those groups never intending to seek the full rights
accorded by registration. Reports include changes in a “religious organization’s” charter
or activities, and a report every two years to renew its registration.
Expert councils composed of representatives of privileged faiths will help judge the
registration materials as necessary, furthering the possibility of bias against some faiths.
Registration may be denied or revoked, and religious groups may be proscribed, based
on a broad but vague list of offenses that some also warn may single out some faiths,
including violating public order, promoting “religious enmity,” using drugs and
“hypnosis” in services, performing lewd and “illegal” actions, and promoting non-
medical forms of healing. Offenses are referred to the courts, which may order the
“liquidation” or “prohibition” of the faith and possible prosecution of its members.
Other provisions seem to restrict the freedom of a religious association to disseminate its
faith to non-members, especially minors, or to set up new congregations where it is not
already registered.
Opponents of the law have pointed to language that seems to give special status to
certain faiths as violating the Constitution. Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates that
“religious associations are separated from the state and are equal before the law,” and
Article 19 prohibits the restriction of citizens’ rights on the grounds of religious
affiliation. Article 28 stipulates that “each person is guaranteed freedom ... to choose,
hold, and disseminate religious and other convictions and to act in accordance with
them.” Opponents of language that seems to give special status to certain faiths also can
point to the Constitution's Article 29, which prohibits propaganda of religious supremacy.
Many in Russia and elsewhere have criticized the law’s apparent violation of Russia’s
international commitments, including the Helsinki Final Act and Vienna Concluding
Document, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights.
The provision requiring that foreign representatives may not engage in religious
activities threatens to restrain the over 4,000 foreign missionaries working in Russia. The
provision that all “religious organizations” be headed by and composed of Russian
citizens or permanent legal residents may affect some faiths where the parent church or
center is abroad or where local congregations are headed by or composed of foreigners.
Even some groups able to prove their existence for more than fifteen years in Russia,
such as some Anglican parishes, may face problems. In such cases, a congregation must
have the foreign center provide Russian authorities with its charter and a confirmation of
its legality by the home government. The provision that “religious groups” may only be
composed of citizens seems to restrict religious observance by non-citizens.
In January 1998, regulations for reviewing applications for registration of branches
of foreign religious associations were promulgated, followed in March by regulations for
other religious associations. Disappointingly to many in the West, the regulations closely
follow the letter of the law. Guidelines for implementation issued by the Justice Ministry
provide a more liberal interpretation of the law and regulations, but the guidelines are not
legally binding. The guidelines suggest that most religious organizations registered under
the 1990 law should be re-registered, that the 15-year rule not apply to centralized
religious organizations and their branches, and that unofficial documents such as news
clipping may be used to satisfy the 15-year rule. Some registration decisions made by
mid-1998 have eased some concerns about how harshly the law would be implemented.

CRS-5
These registrations include those of Pentecostal, Roman Catholic, and Mormon groups.
However, it is unclear whether all faiths will receive similar treatment. Schismatic and
independent religious associations that cannot meet the 15-year rule may be discriminated
against, since they eschew affiliation with centralized religious organizations.

About one-third of Russia’s federal subunits have passed laws restricting certain
religious activities. While the new federal law supersedes local laws, it also provides a
major role for the localities in judging whether groups should be registered. While many
observers have suggested that the law may not be implemented in a harsh fashion in
Moscow and other major urban areas, some localities may view the new law as a "green
flag" to restrict religious activities of which they disapprove. According to the Keston
Institute, evidence during early 1998 indicates that foreign missionaries have not yet
generally suffered restrictions on their activities, though some Russian minority faiths
have suffered harassment at the local level. Keston warns that increased religious
discrimination and repression remain possible as long as the law and its implementing
regulations remain in force. Several individuals and groups have asserted that they will
petition Russia’s Constitutional Court to examine and overturn objectionable parts of the
law (such as Article 27(3)). Critics note that, during the Soviet period, vague religion
laws were interpreted liberally or restrictively depending on political expediency, and
warn that the current law similarly falls short of rule of law standards.
U.S. Response
The United States has generally praised religious freedom in Russia while closely
monitoring Russian behavior and urging it to abide by international human rights
commitments. During the April 1996 U.S.-Russia Summit in Moscow, President Clinton
stated that “it is a real sign of the health of the Russian democracy that religion is
respected and people are free to pursue it and express their honest convictions.” In
November 1996, the Administration formed an Advisory Committee to the Secretary of
State on Religious Freedom Abroad, which has counseled the Administration on the
ramifications of the passage of Russia’s religion bill. President Clinton reportedly sent
a letter to Yeltsin in mid-September 1997 urging him not to sign the revised religion bill.
Vice President Gore, during his September 1997 meeting with then-Prime Minister
Chernomyrdin, reported that he was unsuccessful in convincing the Russian leadership
to reconsider the bill, and in his meeting in March 1998 reported that he urged Russia to
uphold its religious rights commitments. During 1997-1998, Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright, National Security Council Director for Russia William Courtney,
and Ambassador at Large for the NIS Stephen Sestanovich, also have worked with U.S.
religious groups to exhort Russian authorities to uphold religious freedom.
Congress has had some long-term concerns about religious freedom in Russia and
the former Soviet Union, including those reflected in the Lautenberg amendment in 1989
(P.L. 101-167, Sec. 599D), which established enhanced opportunities for Soviet Jews,
Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics, and Ukrainian Orthodox Church members
to qualify for admission to the United States as refugees. The Jackson-Vanik
Amendment (P.L. 93-618, tying trade to Soviet emigration standards) has required the
President to report on Russian emigration policies, which includes assessments of
religious tolerance. The Congressional Commission on Security and Cooperation in
Europe (Helsinki Commission) has held hearings dealing with religious freedom in
Russia and other New Independent States of the former Soviet Union. Congress also has

CRS-6
raised concerns about acts of religious intolerance such as Russian government moves in
1996 against Jewish organizations and negative remarks about certain faiths made by
then-Security Council head Aleksandr Lebed. The issue of religious persecution of
Christians (H.R. 2431, passed the House on May 14, 1998; S. 1868, introduced March
26, 1998), has included discussions of possible repercussions of Russia’s religion law.
After the Russian legislature’s June 1997 passage of the religion bill, many in
Congress signed or sent letters to Yeltsin strongly urging him to veto the bill. After
President Yeltsin signed the religion bill into law in September 1997, many in Congress
sent letters urging Russia to uphold religious freedom and suggesting changes to the law.
The Senate approved S.Con.Res. 58 on November 8, 1997, condemning the potential
restrictiveness of the Russian religion law and calling for Russia to uphold its
commitments to religious freedom. Members of Congress also visited Russia in late
1997 and early 1998 to make their concerns known, and met with Loginov and other
visiting Russian officials in January 1998. Among other proposals, some Members of
Congress and others urged Russia to establish an ombudsman office or other means to
monitor religious rights violations during implementation of the religion law. Perhaps
taking these proposals into account, an Oversight Working Group with this function was
formed, chaired by Loginov, and held its first meeting on May 21, 1998.
The FY1998 Foreign Aid Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-118) contains a provision
prohibiting Freedom Support Act aid to Russia unless the President certifies that the
Russian government "has implemented no statute, executive order, regulation, or similar
government action that would discriminate, or would have as its principal effect
discrimination, against religious groups . . . in violation of accepted international
agreements on human rights," to which Russia is a party. As explained by the conferees
(H.Rept. 105-401), the provision becomes effective in May 1998, to give the
Administration some time to determine whether "the Russian government's actions are
discriminatory." According to estimates, about $15-25 million in unobligated aid to
Russia for FY1998 was at risk. In introducing the amendment in July 1997, Senator
Gordon Smith stated that Congress should send “a strong signal to President Yeltsin that
American tax dollars will not find their way to support any country that treats religious
freedom in such a manner.” Some in Congress have called for the provision to become
an annual requirement, in order to maintain some leverage on Russia, while others argue
that, while the provision has appeared useful, Russia is also subject to censure and other
sanctions internationally if it violates its obligations to uphold religious freedom.
On May 26, 1998, the President determined and certified to Congress that Russia has
applied the religion law "in a manner that is not in conflict with its international
obligations on religious freedom. However, the issue requires continued and close
monitoring as the Law on Religion furnishes regional officials with an instrument that can
be interpreted and used to restrict the activities of religious minorities." A separate
justification document released on May 28 cited awareness of about 25 cases of religious
harassment by local Russian officials since the law was enacted. These cases appear
somewhat isolated, do not appear to reflect a discriminatory policy by the central
government, cannot be attributed to the effects of the new law, and do not appear to
constitute violations of Russia's international obligations to uphold religious freedom.
The Administration pledges to monitor implementation of the law, call on the Russian
government to reverse discrimination at the local level and to ensure that the localities

CRS-7
abide by Russia's international obligations, and urge the ultimate replacement of the
flawed law.