15:45 The representative of the Administrative Center Kalin upheld the appeal and explain the lawyers. The right to present his case transferred to the representative of the Ministry of Justice Borisova.
15:50 The Ministry of Justice considers that a court decision banning Jehovah's Witnesses had been lawful and justified. Borisov says that every religion has the right to spread their beliefs and attitudes, however, the wording should not offend the followers of other religions.
15:35 Omelchenko indicates that there has been a violation of the right to freedom of religion, expression and association, as guaranteed by Art. Art. 9, 10, 11 of the Convention. For example, he drew attention to the requirement of international law that state intervention should be provided by law. In particular, the law must be certain and its application foreseeable. Omelchenko on the materials of the case shows that the use of anti-extremist legislation Jehovah's Witnesses is uncertain and unpredictable.
15:40 International law requires that state interference pursued a legitimate aim and was necessary in a democratic society. Omelchenko notes that the 100-year history not recorded any extremist manifestations on the part of Jehovah's Witnesses. But after this decision, a huge number of believers suffered groundless violation of their rights.
15:10
Novakov drew attention to paragraph 34 of Resolution number 16 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on June 15, 2010. Plenum explained that "new facts" (that is, the facts revealed during the 12 months following the issuance of the warning) may not be recognized as the violations that were revealed after the warning, but allowed in the materials distributed earlier this warning. Novakov notes that the Court of First Instance did not give any assessment to the fact that, although these warnings and made after March 2, 2016, but announced in connection with the events "took place" prior to issuance of the warning of the Russian Federation Prosecutor General's office in Voronezh, in Snezhnogorsk, Stavropol.
15:24 Their explanation begins to advocate Omelchenko. In response to the Court's request not to repeat the explanation of his colleagues, Omelchenko loudly and clearly declared its intention to focus on the violation of international law.
15:25 Omelchenko observes that there is a violation of the right to a fair trial guaranteed by Article. 6 of the European Convention.
15:29 Omelchenko argues convincingly that the court also admitted violating the ban is politically motivated prosecutions arising from Art. 18 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with Art. Art. 9 and 6 of the Convention. The European Court of Human Rights in its judgment in the case, "Merabishvili against Georgia" indicates the most obvious signs of political repression: when the public authorities clearly resist repeated the applicant's appeals, the public and even some senior government officials about the objective and thorough investigation, it can be argued that the applicable the applicant measures are not a means to a legitimate response to his behavior, but a means of political persecution. That is what is happening to Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia.
On Monday, July 17, 2017, a three-judge panel will consider the appeal of the Russian Supreme Court’s April 20 decision against Jehovah’s Witnesses. Further updates about the hearing will be provided using this new breaking news feature. Please pray for our brothers and sisters in Russia. Regardless of the outcome, we are confident that Jehovah has all matters in hand and the nations will know that he is Jehovah.–Ezekiel 38:23...
@bruceq made the following updates: (he is now posting new comments below as they happen)
14:54Novakov shows the sequence of video frames trial clearly show that extremist publications of Jehovah's Witnesses had been planted. He brings to the court and other egregious evidence of falsification of evidence against Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia. All these fraudulent cases are at the heart of the matter.
14:45It gives explanations to the court representative Nowak. And his first thought is that the circumstances relied upon by the Court related to administrative offenses, have no force prejudicial to the case.
14:35As an example of failure to prove the circumstances specified in the court decision, the ax quotes from the decision that the Administrative Center participated in the financing of MPO, which are recognized as extremist. This fact is to prove if the extremist nature of the Administrative Center. However, the Ministry of Justice did not provide the court (as suggested by Ax, intentionally!) Relevant contracts donations and decisions of the Administrative Center for a donation, from which it follows that the donation of funds to these organizations was carried out, first of all, a few years before the recognition of their extremist and, the second is to clearly defined objectives: the construction of buildings of worship, to the victims of natural disasters, utility payments and perform other obligations to the state. All of these contracts and decisions were transferred to the Ministry of Justice Administrative Center during the inspection, previous to applying to the court of Justice.
The third thesis presentation Toporova is that the judgment be set aside due to lack of evidence of the circumstances established by the trial court.
14:24The above-mentioned argument supports the second point Topo: the court's decision is subject to cancellation due to incorrect application of substantive law. Trying to justify the recognition of the structural units of MPO administrative defendant, for whose actions he must answer, the court made a wrong application of substantive law, to apply the law, not to be applied, namely, the laws "On Political Parties", "On Public Associations". The court gave an incorrect interpretation of the law "On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations" and "On Countering Extremist Activity" CAS Russian Federation, including without regard to the legal positions contained in the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces and the Presidium of the Russian Supreme Court.
14:20Conclusions The Court of First Instance contradict the entire long-term established jurisprudence of cases against local religious organizations, said Ax. As evidence, he cites the definition that the Russian Supreme Court stated in its decision of December 8, 2009: "Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia and the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses" Taganrog "is an autonomous organization, which is also confirmed by the adoption of the cassation instance court evidence, including a diagram of the structure of Jehovah's Witnesses" Taganrog ". The question of the rights and duties of the Administrative Center of the Regional Court in considering the above statement the prosecutor of the Rostov region is not resolved, the decision of the Rostov Regional Court on September 11, 2009 local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses "Taganrog" was recognized as extremist and eliminated. " In this case, this court ruling is prejudicial to the present case, as it was handed down by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in respect of the administrative defendant. It establishes the fact that the liquidation of the local religious organization, part of the structure of the Administrative Center shall not affect the rights and obligations of the latter, since this local religious associations and the Administrative Center are independent organizations. The Court of First Instance ignored the evidence that led to the incorrect use of their sub
13:56Turn to give an explanation becomes representative Toporov. The first thesis of his speech focused on Article 310 of the CAS Code, under which "the decision of the trial court shall be subject to unconditional cancellation in case the court decides on the rights and obligations of persons not involved in the administrative case."14:00Court decision eliminated the religious organization "Jehovah's Witnesses Administrative Center in Russia" and included in its structure of local religious organizations. All these local religious organizations are clearly listed in the decision of the court of first instance, and that the transfer takes half of the text of all decisions. However, to participate in the court of the 395 organizations involved were not.
13:55On the other hand, due to the decision of the court themselves believers are subjected to a substantial violation of their rights. Little wife gives various facts to prove it. For example, the fact of refusal believers to replace military service with alternative civilian service on the basis of a court decision. Concluding his speech, little wife attached to the case copies of the minutes and agendas of the draft commissions from the recruiting office.
"And what threat to state or public are we talking about if even the President himself awarded JWs on May 31 in Kremlin?" Check and CHECKMATE
13:52"But, dear court, let's look at the facts and see someone who threatens someone who hurts, - he says Zhenkov.- it was found that over the 26 years of the official activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia has not suffered any damage to the state in the first instance court nor morality in society. No acts of vandalism on the part of Jehovah's Witnesses, there is no violence. So that there is violence, not even acts of protest! It turns out that the threat of a court wrote in its decision, is imaginary, far-fetched. If it was real, then for 26 years of official existence in Russia and 100 years of unofficial, it would be true. But the court's decision does not contain any evidence of harm from their activities. What kind of threat to society and the state can be a question if recently as May 31, 2017, Russian President Vladimir Putin in the Kremlin presents the Order of "Parental Glory" family of Jehovah's Witnesses? "
13:50Fourth thesis Zhenkova - the disparity of the court decision. Little wife quotes from the court's decision: "Contrary to the arguments of opposition organizations such interference is proportionate and necessary ... as it ensures the removal of rights violations, freedoms and legitimate interests of an indefinite number of persons, the real threat of harm to the individual, to public health, public order, public security, public and the state. "
13:45Little wife draws attention to the fact that the Administrative Center has been denied participation in court cases on the recognition of printed materials as extremist. In some cases, the believers do not even know, and what did this or that book as extremist because the court held that Jehovah's Witnesses were innocent. The same position has consistently held and the Supreme Court of Russia, with the result that the Administrative Center had no right to participate in, nor cause his arguments to the court or to appeal against the court decision. And now the court of first instance for some reason, to apply the opposite approach. Now, the Court considers that on the basis of these decisions Administrative Center can be eliminated. "Dear Court - little wife says - you have the opportunity to correct this injustice. The Supreme Court it is important to be consistent, he's a model for all Russian courts. "
13:30Little wife quotes from the Ministry of Justice of the document: "The recognition of information materials confessional Jehovah's Witnesses extremist ... confirms ... the fact of the presence in them prohibitively offensive from the point of view of the Russian Federation methods conviction expression of the truth of their religious beliefs, and in this case not even the truth of beliefs, and in the interpretation of the precepts contained in the Bible. " This characteristic does not correspond to reality. Little wife draws attention to the fact that the vast majority of Jehovah's Witnesses publications "extremist" were found eight years ago. And at that time there was still no decision number 11 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court, which were explained that the courts should be understood as hate speech or hate. Until 2011, some courts have mistakenly believed that if Jehovah's Witnesses religion is called in the literature the only true, it's a sign of incitement to hatred, as an insult to other religions. And if in the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses say that the Trinity - this is not a biblical doctrine, that such an interpretation of the Bible even more, according to some judges, aroused hatred. But that was before 2011, until the Supreme Court did not explain that the criticism of religious associations, religious beliefs, religious practices should not be regarded as an act aimed at inciting hatred or enmity. It took years to get all finally realized that conside
13:20The third thesis Zhenkova: Court of First Instance incorrectly defined the circumstances relevant for administrative affairs. Little wife lists a number of examples.
13:15Zhenkova second thesis is that the findings of the trial court is not appropriate in the circumstances of the administrative case. For example, in the court decision states: "As follows from the case for the past seven years annually required by law to establish the facts of extremist activities of the Organization ..." However, the court found the exact opposite. Lawyer little wife: "Administrative plaintiff in the court acknowledged that the facts have not been established in the actions directly Administrative Center of extremist activities, and the court says - installed."
13:10Little wife gives an example. He says that in the trial we found that in the Crimea of Jehovah's Witnesses for decades peacefully exercising their religious activities. Once on the territory of Russia and performing Russian law, Jehovah's Witnesses in Crimea asked Russian Ministry of Justice to register their 22 local religious organizations. And the Ministry of Justice, recognizing the legitimacy of their existence and the validity of their beliefs, in 2015, to register them. Thus, the state has recognized that on the peninsula of Crimea is possible to believe in Jehovah God, and why religion called Jehovah's Witnesses have the right to legally exist and operate. And what's next? Less than two years later without establishing their actions signs of extremism, but on the orders of the General Prosecutor's Office, the same Ministry of Justice, which is to register them, appealed to the court to recognize their extremist organizations, and to take away from them all their possessions. And the Supreme Court even without the participation of these entities announced their extremist and liquidated, and allow them to take away all the property. "In this regard, there are questions both legal and universal - says little wife: - What a believer in the Crimea is the punishment? For what specific actions? Answers to these questions in the judgment no. But does such a decision may be legal? "
13:08From the transcript of the hearing shows that the trial court asked plaintiff clear legal issues that are important for the proper settlement of the case. The Court received answers that extremism - it is specific actions listed in the law, and that the management center and more than 300 local religious organizations such actions did not commit.But the judgment and the court ruled for some reason just the opposite - to recognize all 396 extremist organizations and to eliminate them. "How is it that a respected court? - exclaims Zhenkov.- Would you like the college, this should not cause problems? If there is no extremist activities, then for that to recognize the extremist ?!
13:04Little wife, "If the Administrative Center did not commit extremist acts, we have a representative of the Ministry of Justice to sort things out in court and whether each of the 395 local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia committed extremist actions? The answer is the Ministry of Justice was limited to the fact that only in respect of 10 of them are court decisions, and in the other there is no such data. A natural question: if the court has not been established that the Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia and at least 385 local religious organizations, committed any extremist actions, why the court found them extremist and liquidated? ".
12:58After finishing the report, the court of the defendant offers to give his explanation. The first lawyer speaks little wife. Zhenkova first thesis is that the court decision does not have evidence of extremist activity of the Administrative Center. Little wife quotes from the protocol of the trial court. The court: "What is confirmed that the organization carried out extremist activity?". Ministry of Justice: "A religious organization has not taken any effective measures to curb this activity ...". The Court also figured in the administrative claimant, whether the adoption of insufficient measures may, or even inaction be a sign of extremism? The Ministry of Justice with reference to the law had to admit - not extremism can only be deliberate actions.
12:15The court announces a break in the meeting on a motion.12:25After returning from the deliberation room, the court refuses to satisfy all the stated applications.12:30Manohina judge begins its essence.12:45Having set out the arguments of the claim, the position of the defendant, the court tells the essence of the decision rendered April 20, 2017.12:51The Court proceeds to paraphrase the appeal filed on behalf of a religious organization.
12:07Since there are no more requests, the Court invited the representative of the Ministry of Justice to express their opinion. The representative of the Ministry of Justice objected to the adjournment proceedings against the video, against the questioning of witnesses - victims of political repression citizens. In addition, the Ministry of Justice against fraud questioning witnesses against the taking of evidence from the courts. The representative of the Ministry of Justice believes that the petition aimed at the revision entered into force court decisions that, in his opinion, it is inadmissible. Video from the fact of violation of citizens' rights representative of the Ministry of Justice considers neotnosimym proof.
12:03Participation by linguists is necessary because the accusations of extremism imposed on Jehovah's Witnesses - are not taken from real life or set of offenses, but only vyuzheny of their liturgical texts. text analysis takes just linguists.12:04Little wife says another application - for the admission of new evidence. We are talking about events that took place after the decision of 20 April, - acts of vandalism and other offenses, provoked by the decision. These events appear in a video, and the little wife petitions for their viewing in the courtroom.
11:59Not allowed previous petitions, the court offers Zhenkovu lawyer read out his application.12:00Little wife seeks interrogation experts (theologians, linguists). The court of first instance court wrongly denied this. Meanwhile, experts explain the need for a legitimate and reasonable solutions. Thus, in the field of religious studies expert could clarify specific concepts of Christianity, which are used in the charter of a religious organization, as well as how the stated goals and objectives of the Jehovah's Witnesses implemented them in practice. Importantly, the theologian could clarify whether the inherent belief in the truth of their religion only to Jehovah's Witnesses, or is it a characteristic of any religion.
11:55Continuing to talk about the need for the taking of evidence, counsel recalls that under the new clause in the law on combating extremist activity the Bible and quotes from it can not be recognized as extremist materials. Call for evidence, the court can make sure that the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses is always based on the Bible, it encourages people to love God and to love one's neighbor, and strengthens faith in the Bible. This all means that the Jehovah's Witnesses literature recognized as "extremist" by mistake and in any case can not serve as a basis for the prohibition of an entire religion, in which hundreds of thousands of adherents in Russia.
11:50Lawyer Omelchenko reminded that the law requires the court to examine all the evidence directly. For example, given the seriousness of the case for freedom of religion throughout the territory of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court should immediately investigate on what grounds was a Jehovah's Witness literature as extremist, and whether these are sufficient grounds to meet the requirements of the Ministry of Justice of Russia. Court could ensure that the literature of Jehovah's Witnesses are no signs of incitement to hatred or enmity in the form in which they identified the Plenum of the Supreme Court in its judgment of 28 June 2011. Another has not set any court! (Under the excitation of hatred and enmity, according to the Plenum, implied statements justifying the genocide, repression, deportations, the use of violence against members of any nation, race or religion. As the Plenum, even criticism of religious beliefs or religious practices should not be seen as extremism.)
11:45The lawyer says Omelchenko extensive petition for the recovery of evidence the courts relied upon by the Ministry of Justice in an attempt to prove the "extremism" Jehovah's Witnesses. A similar petition was stated in the trial court, but the court denied his satisfaction. Therefore, the defendant requests that the Court of Appeal nevertheless reclaim materials from the ships are Jehovah's Witnesses, who were recognized as "extremist". After all, court decisions on their own are not prejudicial to the case, such as the Court of First Instance found, in view of the fact that the Administrative Center has not participated in the review.
11:31Novakov representative said the request for the examination of witnesses planted of extremist literature and other fraud, organized or used by law enforcement agencies, according to the cases relied upon by the Ministry of Justice in its lawsuit. Witnesses were in the courtroom and are willing to testify.11:40Novakov said that four witnesses were in the courtroom. The Court, without prejudging definitions of file petitions and asks, is there any other application. Novakov seeks to call in the courtroom another 53 witnesses fraud.
11:28The lawyer Lew continues to apply for the examination of witnesses Pavla Bezhenarya and Anatoliya Yasinskogo. They are recognized as victims of political repression as Jehovah's Witnesses. They know that the prohibition of religious organizations is harsh and unfounded persecution of believers of the religion. Thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses in April 1951 lost their property and were sent in cattle cars from the western regions of the USSR into permanent exile in Siberia, and later they were subjected to searches, confiscation of religious literature, discrimination and imprisonment because live by the Bible's commandments. Bejenaru, for example, known information about that in 1951 he and his family were expelled from Moldova to Tomsk region. Later he was twice convicted and spent 8 years in prison on the grounds that followed Christ's command: "Put your sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." Because of discrimination it six times had to relocate. In 1982, he was faced with the search and seizure of religious literature. Having recognized these people as victims of political repression, the government condemned the "years of terror unleashed by the Bolshevik Party and the Soviet regime against the clergy and the faithful of all religions" and committed itself to "ensure real guarantees of the rule of law and human rights." In fact, the government has promised to make sure that does not happen that with which they are faced.
11:22Omelchenko said the lawyer request for interrogation as witnesses of rehabilitated citizens who are Jehovah's Witnesses. The Court of First Instance rejected in their interrogation. Contrary to his promise, the court did not examine the right degree circumstances of political repression against Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia, for example, ignored the question, what actions of public authorities have already been recognized by political repression, and did not check whether to continue these acts committed against Witness Jehovah now.
why the lawyer asked to postpone this hearing to determine the participants of the Whole proceedings on appeal against the decision.
11:11The room is composed of judges who will hear the case. Declaring the case, they establish who is party. Besides Viburnum Zhenkova, Lew and Novakova side administrative transponder is lawyer Yuriy Toporov. The composition of the Judicial Board - Manohina judge Galina (chairman), Zaytsev Vladimir Yurevich Vladimir V. Popov. None of the parties is to state the reasons for someone to judge the challenge.11:17After the introductory words of the lawyer Omelchenko said motion to postpone consideration of the case until then, until the decision will be made by the numerous individual complaints, which have been adopted in the production of the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Court. The lawyer explains that the decision of the court numerous complaints from individuals were filed on April 20, which substantiated the details that have been affected by the decision of their rights and interests, and thus they had to be brought to participate in the case. The fact that they did not have the opportunity to participate in the case, itself indicates that the decision should be automatically canceled. However, all these complaints were returned without any analysis of the given arguments. The Court merely stated that "the contested judicial act does not resolve the issue of their rights and responsibilities." In response, citizens filed a private complaint, however, contrary to all logic, the Court intends to consider them already after will make a final decision on the case. That's why
9:30On 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. 10:00To 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.10:05In 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. 10:40Place an administrative claimant is empty. On the part of the defendant administration - representative of a religious organization Vasiliy Mihaylovich Kalin, lawyers Viktor Zhenkov and Anton Omelchenko, a lawyer Maksim Novakov. 10:50In the courtroom, leaning over a tablet, journalists of Russian mass media work. Place an administrative claimant takes Svetlana Konstantinovna Borisova, who represented the Ministry of Justice in the Court of First Instance.11:10The room was quiet, the parties and observers are waiting for the judges. 11:11The room is composed of judges who will hear the case. Declaring the case, they establish who is party. Besides Viburnum Zhenkova, Lew and Novakova side administrative transpond
Ok .... the next questions that beg to be answered are ....
WHY?
Does it serve God, or theocratic interests in any way, shape or form, to be stuck forever?
NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF.
Does it serve any human or Theocratic interest to be stuck forever?
NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF.
Perhaps someone else knows WHY this interpretation would be a righteous thing to insist on, but I just don't see it.
WHY would Jehovah God require such a thing ?
How is this a benefit to ANYONE!?
This condemns THOUSANDS, perhaps TENS OF THOUSANDS of Brothers and Sisters to a lonely cruel death for no apparent REASON. (... that I can think of .....)
..................................................................................................
My current theory is this: You cannot have a crime or sin without an injured party, whether it is God, or human ... and the abandoned spouse when abandoned forever remarrying ( after a legal, civil divorce ) hurts NO ONE ... neither God, nor human.
..........................................................................................................................
Any takers?
Pretty much. There has to be evidence that the departing spouse has committed adultery thereby 'scripturally' releasing the abandoned one from the marriage. If not, then, pfft, stuck forever.
However, I saw this in the Branch Correspondence Guidelines (2007, revised 2008):
"What if a mate is long missing and
presumed dead? The law may allow
that after a set time and a diligent but
unsuccessful search for the person, he
or she may be declared legally dead. If
that occurs and the 'survivor' truly believes
the absentee to be dead, he or
she may remarry but should be willing
to bear responsibility before God.—w69
7/15 447-8." - p. 75
Thank you so much dear sister @Arauna - you've the right perspective ! We've so nice comments, can't reply so fast I want do, I'm sorry But we all doing our best ! My wishes from Germany ! Agape
I just wanted to thank the organizers of this site. I enjoy the news and other items on a regular basis. I am also grateful that it has not been taken over by hostile people who hate JWs. On the odd occasion there have been a few nasty individuals but they are in the minority.
I understand that if they allow more controversy - the owners may receive more visitors and may make more money. I am therefore more grateful that they have not allowed money to become the primary focus of this site.
Thanks for some of the interesting items - although we do not always comment on them - we do notice them.
BY JASON LE MIERE ON 7/13/17 AT 2:54 PM
Russians overwhelmingly support a ban on Jehovah’s Witnesses operating in the country, despite half admitting that they know nothing about the case against them, according to a poll on Thursday. Russia’s Supreme Court ruled in April that the Christian denomination violated the country’s anti-extremism law, liquidating all 395 of its local religious chapters.
An appeal of the verdict will be heard next week but most Russians, it appears, have already made up their mind. Fifty-one percent of respondents to a survey from Russia’s leading independent polling agency, the Levada Center, said that they “definitely” approved of the banning of Jehovah’s Witnesses activities. A further 28 percent said they were at least somewhat supportive. Meanwhile, just three percent said they were definitely opposed to the decision, which was initially made by Russia’s justice ministry in March.
At the same time, of the 1,600 people surveyed between June 23 and June 26, just 13 percent said they knew about the case against the Jehovah’s Witnesses in detail. A further 34 percent they had heard something about it, but 50 percent replied that they didn't know anything.
In a separate question of whether people knew who the Jehovah’s Witnesses were, 20 percent said that they heard nothing about them, with another 10 percent undecided. Forty-nine percent responded by stating that the group was a Christian sect.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are known for their refusal of blood transfusions, something which the justice ministry used as evidence of extremism in the Supreme Court case. The United States-based group, which has operated in Russia since 1991 and has some 175,000 members, has claimed that it was denied the chance to mount any sort of defense and barred from having any dialogue with the authorities about their accusations.
The decision was an attack on religious freedom and it has been widely condemned, including by the United States and the European Union, said the Jehovah’s Witnesses. In its annual report in April, The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) placed Russia in its highest tier of violators of religious freedom for the first time.
“Through a cynical use of an extremely flawed set of anti-extremism laws, Russia has banned for the first time in its history a centrally administered religion,” the chair of the independent bipartisan commission, Thomas Reese, said following the release of the report.
But the ban has been supported by the Russian Orthodox Church, which has become increasingly popular and influential under President Vladimir Putin. Seventy-two percent of the Russian population were identified as belonging to the Orthodox Church in 2008, more than double the percentage from 1991.
http://www.newsweek.com/jehovahs-witnesses-ban-russia-religion-636242
The Librarian reacted to bruceq in LIVE BLOG: Jehovah's Witnesses Appeal Russian Supreme Court Ruling
The Librarian got a reaction from Queen Esther in JW Lego Sets for children
The Librarian got a reaction from JW Insider in LIVE BLOG: Jehovah's Witnesses Appeal Russian Supreme Court Ruling
