THE MATRIMONY BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE CHURCH BEARS FRUIT
The incident that happened on March 28 between the members of the “First Archibrigade”, an association of students from the Faculty of Architecture from Skopje, who wanted to stage their “First Architectural Offensive” under the motto “Do not rape the city” in a protest against the construction of a church on the main city square in Skopje, on the location between the former Department Store and the restaurant “Dal Met Fu” and their spontaneously organized opponents, who readily waited on the site of the previously announced peaceful demonstrations is undoubtedly a school example of the violation of one of the basic human rights – the right to assembly and association[1]. Apart from the fact that this self-organization is just another borrowing from the time of the rise of Slobodan Milosevic’s star – the so-called “people’s developments”.
The right to free assembly and association is clearly stipulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights[2] and the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights[3] and the Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which protects the right to freedom of assembly and association. The Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia also acknowledges this right. Line 1 of Article 8 on the fundamental values of the constitutional order of the Republic of Macedonia says that “the basic freedoms and rights of the individual and citizen, recognized in international law are set down in the Constitution“. Article 9 stipulates: “Citizens of the Republic of Macedonia are equal in their freedoms and rights, regardless of sex, race, color of skin, national and social origin, political and religious beliefs, property and social status“, while Article 19 guarantees “the right to express one's faith freely and publicly, individually or with others“. However, it decisively notes that “The Macedonian Orthodox Church and other religious communities are separated from the state and equal in front of the law “, just as Article 20 and 21 guarantees the freedom of association and gathering[4] .
In its attempts to accuse the victims and protect the attackers, the Ministry of Interior refers to Article 4 of the Law on amending the Law on Public Assemblies (ironically adopted in the time when the existing opposition held the power – February 2006!)[5]. This only makes the old paragraph 2 of this Article relative (Law on Public Assemblies adopted in 1995), according to which “the organizer may notify the Ministry of Interior on the public gathering”, but this is not mandatory as the Article 21 of the Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia does not require this (“Citizens have the right to assemble peacefully and to express public protest without prior announcement or a special license“). So, MoI refers to an amended article of a law that is problematic in relation to a clear constitutional provision, making it unconstitutional and as such cannot serve as a justification let alone accusation of the organizers as being responsible for the incidents in front of court of law.
The MoI considered its share in the incident to be successful, although the prevailing opinion in the public is that the police officers acted as observers and did not intervene. It still remains unclear whether the Prime Minister’s withdrawal after the initial statement and pointing out to one distinguished university professor as organizer of the protests (which definitely contains elements of defamation) is a guarantee that the culprits will be identified and taken in front of the court (“Everyone has the right to express one’s opinion, to protest, to support, to condemn; but beating and incidents are not allowed. Measures should be and will be taken against all those participating in the incident in some way”).
Unfortunately, the matters are not that simple and go beyond the incident, which could be also arrogantly treated as insignificant and not rare event even in more developed democratic societies.
First of all, since gaining the power in 2006, the governments of VMRO-DPMNE have touched on the democratic principles, in which great efforts were put and high cost was paid to be respected: autonomy of the University (by changing the Rector’s Board of the Tetovo University by the Minister of Education and Science and gathering signatures at the state universities in support of a partisan presidential candidate); prevention of the strike in education and culture and now the right to freedom of assembly. What can be expected then after April 5, when we shall have absolute power of one party or one coalition on all levels?
In and around the whole incident we had ample examples of the hate speech – at the demonstrations (use of the offensive name “Siptars” for the Albanians, “the defenders of the faith” have put curses on the atheist “communists”, which is a new trend in the political confrontation in Macedonia) and in the media (e.g. the article in “Vecer” under the headline “Chaos and Unrest: Branko is Coming Back![6]“ or the call on the blog “Jadi Burek”[7]).
In the monthly report for December 2007 and January 2008[8], the Helsinki Committee referred to the issue of secularism in the Republic of Macedonia, noting that the construction of the church on this location, which stirred the incident, has an infamous history considering the rule of law: the decision on construction was adopted with acclamation upon the idea of the Prime Minister, the Ministry of Culture has opened an international public call for architectural and urban design with an award pool of MKD 860,000 (budget money)... although the detailed urban plan of Skopje and the Municipality of Centar did not foresee the development of such facility on the main square! However, this was easily resolved post festum – during the ongoing decentralization process, the central authorities showed to the local ones, who is in charge – so the Municipality of Centar “has played by the rules” and amended the detailed urban plan and after the local elections the Government should get a more cooperative mayor of Skopje unlike the existing mayor Trifun Kostovski.
At that time, there was no official explanation on why the state and not the faith community is building this religious facility. We have noted then that at least in that stage “all preparations for the construction (including the use of budget funds) are beyond the legal procedures and reflect the obstinacy and arrogance of the ruling government.”
Even then, but also now, we believe that the trickiest thing in this situation is the fact that with this decision the Government has directly brought into question the principle of secularity i.e. the division between the state and faith communities. But this is not the only thing. The previous governments, particularly the one of VMRO-DPMNE (1998-2002) spent money for building the Millennium Cross on Vodno Mount, the Plaoshnik church in Ohrid and tried to introduce the religious education. Even if there were any cultural or civilization explanations for these decisions (2000 years since the crucifixion of the Jesus Christ, paying honor to St. Clement of Ohrid...) the Government has no justification for the latest decision, except for the statements of the governmental spokesperson and the Prime Minister that there are churches on the main squares in all European cities (what about the cities in which there are synagogues or mosques in the centre...).
At the end we have noted: “This decision is simply a step forward in promoting “state religion” or more precisely “state faith communities” seen through the Macedonian Orthodox Church (MOC) and the Islamic Religious Community (IRC). In this respect the decision for construction of an Orthodox church and eventually the decision for building a mosque in Tetovo are only favoring these two faith communities. The political motives of the ruling parties are clear and visible. For this government of VMRO-DPMNE this is a logical step after the attempt to get blessing from MOC for its parliamentary candidates before the latest parliamentary elections (in 2006), while its Albanian coalition partner (DPA at that time) does not even hide its control over IRC. The introduction of religious education, disputed in front of the Constitutional Court, is a kind of a favor granted by the government to these favored faith communities in order to establish closer mutual relations. Now, it is clear that they are joined in holy matrimony and have already started the honeymoon.
The claims of part of the public that the incident at the Skopje city square is part of a deeper internal conflict between the citizens incited by the authorities are not ungrounded. In fact, sowing the seeds of fear as a method has been already evident in the past several years in many areas in the public and private life. Whether this is a case of political manipulation with religious feelings, imposing a deep division filled with emotions/hatred on political grounds and division between believers and heretics and announcement of other “differentiations” is yet to be seen.
Skopje, March 31, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The web site of Arthur W. Diamond Law Library at Columbia Law School lists as basic human rights the following: freedom of religion, conviction and opinion; freedom of rallying, demonstration and request for gathering signatures and freedom of association.
[2] Article 20, paragraph 1: “Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association“.
[3] Article 21: “The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”
[4] Article 20: “Citizens are guaranteed freedom of association to exercise and protect their political, economic, social, cultural and other rights and convictions.
Citizens may freely establish associations of citizens and political parties, join them or resign from them...“
Article 21: “Citizens have the right to assemble peacefully and to express public protest without prior announcement or a special license.
The exercise of this right may be restricted only during a state of emergency or war“.
[5] “In Article 3 following paragraph 1, new paragraph 2 is being added, saying: "The announcement of public gathering is submitted to the local police station responsible for the area in which the public gathering is held no later than 48 hours since the beginning of the public gathering. Paragraph 2 becomes 3“.
[6] Please see the link on Vecer Online: http://www.vecer.com.mk/?ItemID=884179CBD4B9D0409E6BBBF592ED1B60
[7] Please see: http://jadiburek.blog.com.mk/node/219489
[8] Follow the link: http://www.mhc.org.mk/?ItemID=08807F9A27B35E4898D50E9A67CC8B75 |
