NEW UNACCEPTABLE CONVICTION OF KEFE BY GREEK JUDICIARY, CONDEMNED BY THE EUROPEAN COURT WHICH CONSTITUTES YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE LACK OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE

GREEK HELSINKI MONITOR

(Greek National Committee of the International Helsinki Federation)

& MINORITY RIGHTS GROUP - GREECE

(Greek Affiliate of Minority Rights Group International)

P.O. Box 51393, GR-14510 Kifisia, Greece

Tel. 30-1-620.01.20; Fax: 30-1-807.57.67; E-mail: helsinki@compulink.gr

_____________________________________________________________________

 

PRESS RELEASE

 

23/12/1997

 

TOPIC: NEW UNACCEPTABLE CONVICTION OF KEFE BY GREEK JUDICIARY, CONDEMNED BY THE EUROPEAN COURT WHICH CONSTITUTES YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE LACK OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE

 

The affiliated organisations Greek Helsinki Monitor and Minority Rights Group - Greece condemn the decision 10493/97 by the Three-member Appeal Court of Athens (Civil Branch) which strongly upholds the previous decision of 1996 to disband the Greek Centre for Social Philosophy (KEFE), using approximately the same rationale. These are rationales which have been internationally condemned as a violation of the principles of religious freedom. This lack of religious tolerance in Greece, as is well-known, has led to repeated condemnations of Greece by the European Court of Human Rights.

 

Particularly, we also condemn the nearly complete suppression of the publication of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights which, on 16/12/1997 condemned Greece for religious discrimination against the Roman Catholic Church, awarding it Drs5,000,000 compensation for the damage it suffered, plus Drs5,908,000 for legal costs. This was suppressed by the same mass media which systematically pronounces every similar condemnation against Turkey.

 

We remind you that the case concerned a judicial battle between the Roman Catholic church of Our Lady of Hania in Crete, and a nearby resident who had demolished a part of the church wall. The appeal by the Roman Catholic Church was dismissed by the lower courts, as well as by the Supreme Court, with the lame excuse that this particular church was not entitled to protection because it does not have a legal presence in Greece. On the contrary, the European Court, in a slap-in-the-face decision for the self-interested policy of the Greek state in religious matters, stated correctly that it violates the European Convention on Human Rights, which forbids discrimination on religious grounds (Article 14), while upholding the right to legal protection for groups or individuals (Article 6).

 

Because of this case, our organisations appreciate that all religions without exception must, in their relationship with the state, encounter them with a united front and accordingly all have the same legal status so that they won’t awaken in the international communal opinion strong and justifiable doubts about the religious neutrality of the Greek state. We believe that in view of the imminent constitutional review, a stipulated safeguard in the constitution principles of the full separation of the Church and State could safeguard the freedom of religious conscience. If this separation doesn’t come about, each successive government will be endlessly susceptible to pressures from certain circles or from the leadership of the Orthodox Church, in a way which ever-increasingly violates the present constitutional basis.

 

An incidence of religious fanaticism, which also was compensated almost in full and which justifies our above concerns, took place ten days ago at the 2^nd senior school in Volos. Two priests tried to subject the school’s pupils to compulsory confession, reviving some “traditions” which we thought were part of the Greek past.

The correct reaction of the Head of the Second Degree Education is not enough of a shield against the lack of respect for the student’s religious freedom, particularly when accompanied by fierce protests from the Archbishop Dimitriados Christodoulou.

 

Finally, in view of the holiday period in which we find ourselves, we would like to point out the discord which we observe on an institutional- symbolic level, due to the systematic oversight, on the part of the President of the Democracy, to invite a representative of the Muslims (e.g. a Mufti) to events, in the same way as he receives the visits of representatives of “other” dogmas and religions (which are inappropriately termed “foreign”) in the New Year celebrations.