CENTRE FOR MONITORING THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS IN EUROPE ANNUAL REPORT “Violations of the Rights of Orthodox Christians in Europe in 2016” Impressum: CENTRE FOR MONITORING THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS IN EUROPE 21, Quai Rouget de Lisle 67000 Strasbourg FRANCE www.orthodoxrights.org Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required. Contents Introduction................................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 1: Defamation of Orthodox Churches and believers..................................... 5 A.Reaction of the Orthodox Local Churches to the defamation against the Orthodox Churches and their believers................................................... 14 Chapter 2: Humiliation, hate speech, inhuman treatment and murders of Orthodox Christians................................................................................................. 20 A. Reaction of the Local Orthodox Churches to the humiliation of their members, hate speeches and violence........................................................... 33 Chapter 3: Violations of the freedom of expression of Orthodox believers.............. 39 A. Reaction of the Local Orthodox Churches to the violations of the freedom of expression of Orthodox believers............................................................................ 49 Chapter 4: Discrimination of Orthodox Christians..................................................... 56 A. Reaction of the Local Orthodox Churches to the discrimination of their members.......................................................................................................... 69 Chapter 5: The Right of Freedom of Assembly for Orthodox Christians................... 78 A. Reaction of the Local Orthodox Churches and the State authorities to the violation of the freedom of assembly of the Orthodox Christians.................. 106 Chapter 6: Acts of Vandalism and Desecration against Orthodox Worship and Sacred Places.......................................................................... 111 A. Reaction of the Local Orthodox Churches to the vandalism and the desecration of the Orthodox worship and sacred places..................................... 143 Conclusions................................................................................................................... 148 Photos........................................................................................................................... 151 3 Introduction The Centre for Monitoring the Rights as websites of local Orthodox Churches, and Freedom of Orthodox Christians dioceses, parishes, and Church-linked in Europe (CRFO) was established in media. 2014 in order to monitor violations of the rights and freedoms of Orthodox In 2016 the CRFO cooperated with various Christians in Europe. It is supported Human Rights activists and worked with by the Representation of the Russian materials from the UN, OSCE, the Council Orthodox Church to the Council of of Europe and the European Union. Europe, presenting its annual report for This report could not cover all violations the year 2016. due to a lack of information from various The monitoring of the rights and countries as well as the difficulty of certain freedoms of Orthodox Christians in languages. It is necessary to recognize Europe within 47 member countries of that a lot of information on the violations the Council of Europe entails registering of the Orthodox Christians in Europe is violations of freedoms of conscience, not accessible in English. Therefore, we expression, assembly and other liberties welcome any contribution that can be and rights. Reoccurring violations sent to the Center of Monitoring about include defamation, humiliation, hate the violations of the rights of Orthodox speech, discrimination, intolerance, Christians in 2016 in Europe and which hostility against Orthodox priests, Church can complete the present report. property and/or Orthodox believers. The Centre only observes violations that are aimed against the Orthodox Christian faith or morality, whether they are direct or indirect. As a general rule, the end of each report chapter includes official reactions of the local Churches to the violations of rights of their believers. This is done to inform the various national and international authorities about such cases. Such reactions demonstrate the gravity of the violations that occur. This report is prepared on the basis of open sources accessible online with references and links. The preference, as a rule, is given to primary sources, such 4 Chapter 1 : Defamation of Orthodox Churches and believers. The CRFO observed cases of defamation Bishop Pavlos underlined at the end of his (presenting in public false information) interview: “This is all that we have, this is all of the Orthodox Churches in different we can do. Is this the thanking of Mr Mayor European countries. for what we offered? What is the purpose of this defamation?” Defamation of an Orthodox Diocese Sources (GREECE) http://www.romfea.gr/diafora/6627-o-mitropolitis-kozanis- apanta-gia-to-gkertseio-binteo February 24, 2016 - The Mayor of Kozani (Greece) Mr. Eleftherios Ionnidis was asked from the local TV channel TOP Defamation of the Ukrainian about the arrival of refugees and he said Orthodox Church (Moscow that Metropolitan of Servia and Kozani, Patriarchate) from mass media Pavlos denied to concede a building which (UKRAINE) belongs to the church as a shelter for refugees, as the website romfea reports. February 2, 2016 - “Patriotically oriented” Ukrainian mass media keeps hyping up the Metropolitan Pavlos reacted to this “prohibition” of the Ukrainian language in defamation which presents church leaders the UOC worship practice by His Beatitude hostile against Muslim refugees and Metropolitan Onuphriy. Despite numerous indifferent towards the human tragedy. publications by the Union of the Orthodox He gave an interview on TV channel TOP Journalists and other resources, refuting where he revealed the true conversation lies about such prohibition, experts in that he had with Mayor of Kozani. “customized” reporting pursue with their Bishop Pavlos said that he explained to Mr. activity. Journalists from the «Religion Ioannidis that this building is not suitable in Ukraine», «Observer» and «RISU» for people because there is no electricity, editions have placed the other day their own toilettes, heating or water. He suggested interpretation of the UOC Primate’s words Mayor to take the keys of the building in concerning a divine worship language in order to see with his own eyes the situation the Church said by the Metropolitan in his there. Metropolitan Pavlos proposed him interview to the UOJ. to offer food and bedding for the needs A wave of accusations by the Ukrainian of refugees, but it is impossible to offer a mass media of mythical persecutions of building. The Mayor agreed and he took the state language of Ukraine in the UOC from the bishop 150 blankets, 500 bottles churches surged after 28 December, when of water. Three priests and some women the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra hosted a Diocesan were cooking food for refugees until 4 Assembly of the Kyiv UOC diocese chaired o’clock in the morning. 5 by His Beatitude Metropolitan Onuphriy. UOC was depicted once more as an anti- At this Assembly the UOC Primate gave Ukrainian collaborationist. The “press his answer, inter alia, to the question of tribe” thought up nothing new in this probable extended use of the Ukrainian respect. It was sufficient to come up with language in the Church worships. As a a scandalous headline, fish out contextual reminder, there is a provision currently in quotes and furnish them with “necessary” force that was approved by the predecessor comments. Metropolitan Vladimir, according to which Ukrainian can become an official worship It’s commonly known that the publication’s language in parishes where 2/3 of the name has to reflect the article’s content. Not parishioners chose to serve in Ukrainian. all but just a few readers look through all the news feed, but titles are never skipped, as a His Beatitude Onuphriy stated that no rule. It is namely the titles of articles, their amendments are anticipated as for the use informational and emotional message that of the divine worship language because “we shape the reader’s attitude to the material have services in the old Slavic language published. – the very language our ancestors used in their church services. There is no way we Sources are going to change it. If a man, in order http://www.religion.in.ua/news/ukrainian_news/31710- to make some money, leaves for Turkey mitropolit-onufrij-nastaivaet-yazyk-molitvy-mozhet-byt-tolko- cerkovnoslavyanskij.html or China, he/she will have to learn the languages spoken there, whereas in order http://obozrevatel.com/politics/71392-ne-zahotyat-sluzhit- onufrij-pridumal-novyij-dovod-protiv-molitv-na-ukrainskom. to save a soul, one feels lazy to learn their htm native language”. http://risu.org.ua/ua/index/all_news/orthodox/uoc/62354/ These words gave a push to the flood of lies about purportedly anti-Ukrainian position of the UOC Primate. The fact Defamation of the Khust Diocese that the UOC parishes continued to have (UKRAINE) services in Ukrainian before and after 28 December was surely silenced by the February 20, 2016 - The information “critics”. For when a foe image is being provided in the publication of the shaped (this is precisely the way all these Transcarpathian