DO NOT TOUCH MY RELIGION, HONOR AND MOTHERLAND

All the studies and ceremonies which are diverged from the Armenian Apostolic Church and do not correspond to the canonical and traditional principles of the Armenian apostolic Church should be considered as sects and elucidated by media as such.

The emotional and glamorous speech of ‘Kyanki Khosq” was crushed on 13 of July at the judicial session to which the reader of ‘Iravunk’ can get acquainted by reading further. Before that it should be mentioned that after the long and pathetic speech of the representative of ‘Kyanki Khosq’ which lasted nearly 2,5 hours when the question was asked to the representative which episode violated the reputation, which the dignity, the latest did not answer in substance whether calling ‘Kyanqi Khosk’ Sect harmed the honor, dignity or maybe the business reputation.

Anyway, the legal formation of those was given by the representative of the newspapers ‘Iravunk’, ‘Argumenti nedeli’ and ‘Komsomolskaya pravda’, the general director of Lev Group advocate’s office, the founder of the page ‘Reception of lawyer’ of ‘Iravunk’ newspaper, advocate Levon Baghdasaryan.

We are presenting th brief summary of the speech presented in the court by Mr. Baghdasaryan.

Respected Court

The honor is appreciation given by the public for moral, political, labor, practical and other characteristics of a person.

The dignity is realizing of objective appreciation by a person, that is to say realizing of your own merits.

The honor and the dignity are interconnected and organic unity.

Despite of the fact that the connection between them is obvious, the substantive difference is that the honor is public objective characteristics, while the dignity is subjective self-appreciation.

According to the Article 43 of the Constitution of RA The fundamental human and civil rights and freedoms set forth in Article  27 may be temporarily restricted only by the law if it is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public order, crime prevention, protection of public health and morality, constitutional rights and freedoms, as well as honor and reputation of others.

Limitations on fundamental human and civil rights and freedoms may not exceed the scope defined by the international commitments assumed by the Republic of Armenia.

According to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights freedom of expression, (stipulated in the Article 10, part 1) is one of the grounds of democratic society and the main condition for the development and self-realization of its members.

According to the 2^nd part of the Article 10 freedom of expression includes not onlysuch information and ideas which are favorable, harmless or neutral but also such which offends, shocks or worries.

Those are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and liberalism without which the democratic society does not exist (Lingensn vs. Austria, N 9815/82, 8/07/1986, ECHR, para. 41).

The mentioned principles become more important from the point of media. The media does important functions in democratic society.

Although it cannot exceed some frames especially concerning the rights and authority of others, nevertheless media has an obligation to spread information and ideas concerning all the issues which are subject of public interest in the frame of its obligations and responsibilities.

Not only media has obligation to spread such information and ideas but also the public has right to get such information and ideas (Id., para 41).

Moreover, considering the freedom of media it should be mentioned that it also includes some level of exaggeration and even an opportunity to provocation. In this sense the Article 10 protects not only the contents of the information and ideas but also the wayof expressing that (Prager and Obershlik vs. Austria, N 15974/90, 26/04/1995, ECHR, para. 38; De Haes and Gisels vs. belgium, N 19983/92, 24/02/1997, ECHR, para. 48; Chemodurov vs. Russia, N 72683/01, 31/07/2007, ECHR, para. 19).

Concerning the freedom of journalist to spread information the ECHR mentions that The Article 10 of the Convention protects the right of journalist to spread information which is the subject of public interest in case the journalist acts conscientiously and based on the accurate factual grounds and provides trustable and certain information according to the ethical norms of journalists (Shabanov and Tren vs. Russia, N 5433/02, 14/12/2006, ECHR, para. 40).

Concerning the freedom of journalist to express opinion it should be stated that the truthfulness of appreciating judgment is not of subject to be proven. It is impossible to fulfill the demand to prove appreciating judgment and such demand itself can violate the freedom of expression which is the fundamental part of the right guaranteed by the Article 10 of the Convention.

Nevertheless, the appreciating judgment which lacks of some factual grounds may be exaggerated. Therefore, the issue is whether there were enough factual grounds for the appreciating judgment (Karman vs. Russia, N 29372/02, 14/12/2006, ECHR, para. 41; Greenberg vs. Russia, N 23472/03, 21/07/2005, ECHR, para. 30).

So, all the argumentations which have been presented by the supplementing document to the claim become no sense as the plaintiffs have accepted the fact that the published information cannot be considered as an insult or slander by their vocabulary and other explanations.

In particular, they have referred to the vocabulary for the explanation of the term “sect” and quoted the following from the “Ardi hayereni bacatrakan bararan” (“Explanatory dictionary of modern Armenian”) of E.B. Aghayan:

1. religious study out of the frames of the certain church,
2. strange religious to the one adopted in that country,
3. followers of  certain sect,
4. direction which diverges from certain study.

And the term “sect followers” means:

1. follower of the sect, heretic,
2. Figure governed by group narrow interests and dogmatic beliefs,
3. something that is considered as a sect, something including sect.

Extract from the answer of the letter directed to the Holiness is presented to the Court:

Respected Mr. Baghdasaryan

We are informing you that:

1. The Armenian Apostolic Church has no connection with the religious organization “Kyanki Khosq”. So, it cannot be considered as part of Armenian Church,
2. “Kyanqi Khosq” is considered as a sect as its religious and study is diverged from the Apostolic veritable Church’s religious and traditions. Its customs and ceremonies do not match to the principles of the Church. It is not accepted because it does not have Apostolic sequence and clergy.

Respected Court

The stereotype, according to which it is possible to deal with proselytism under the freedom of religious and the state should be in unhelpful condition, is not only wrong but also the Europe Parliamentary Assembly’s Recommendation No. 1412 encourages to struggle against different religious secret or the organizations of spiritual nature hidden under the shape of religious groups.

Moreover, it is stipulated in the Main Law of the Republic of Armenia: freedom of activities for all religious organizations in accordance with the law shall be guaranteed in the Republic of Armenia. The Republic of Armenia recognizes the exclusive historical mission of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church as a national church, in the spiritual life, development of the national culture and preservation of the national identity of the people of Armenia.

Unfortunately, the modern legal science often forgets about its spiritual routs the negative results of which the world feels in such fields as public, state and international relationships.

Under the name of European reforms or renovations some standards are imported by some individuals or organizations which destroy the grounds of European and world civilization, the grounds of the new world which founder is Jesus Christ.

Armenia is the first of this new world which adopted the Christianity in the state level. The Armenian Apostolic Church is the bearer of Christianity in Armenia. All the ceremonies and advices distorted from the Armenian Apostolic Church doctrine if not corresponding with the Armenian Apostolic Church’s canonical and traditional principles, should be considered as sects and should be covered by the press as such.