RELIGIOUS POLICY – THE PRACTICES (V) (Continued)

Religious Policy-The Practices 

By Van Nguyen




The ordinance draft on the religion compiled by the Bureau of Religious affairs had only received negative reactions from the Consultative council of Religious, representatives of the Catholic Church’s hierarchy, and the clergy. It is unknown whether or not remarks from highly respected personalities and dignitaries are taken into consideration.  After six years of preparation, on January 16, 2004, the “Ordinance on Beliefs and Religions” was promulgated by the Permanent Bureau of the National Assembly. After the promulgation, the interested in the subject professed disfavor able reactions and sour reluctance.       

The new law comprises six chapters with 41 articles. Chapter I (Articles 1-8) stipulates general prescriptions pertaining to the right to religious freedom and the protective function of the Sate in this regard. (Article I) specifies the civic duties of dignitaries and adepts. Chapter II (Articles 9-16), defines notably the characters of religious activities of beliefs or religions and the obligations the believer or adept has to observe (Article 9). Chapter III (Articles 16-25) enumerates the obligations a recognized religious organization has to observe in various instances of activities performances. (Articles 16-21); stipulate rules and regulations concerning ordination, title attribution, nomination, election of religious dignitaries;  (Article 22), displacement of the clergy; (Article 23), rules and regulations for schools of formation. Chapter IV (Articles 26-33) formulate regulations on the use of properties of establishments of cult of the believers or religious and  social activities of religious organizations by the adepts, the religious, and ecclesiastic dignitaries. Chapter V (Articles 34-37) defines the rights to international relations of religious organizations of the adepts, the religious and ecclesiastic dignitaries. Chapter VI (Articles 38-41) prescribes various clauses of application.

Reactions from Domestic Churches of Evangelical Christianity

The ordinance provoked negative reactions from various domestic Churches of Evangelical Christianity. The Alliance of Evangelical Churches of Vietnam, in particular, sustained much more sufferings from the dispositions of the new ordinance. In a letter to the world diffused on September 16, 2004, the Alliance expressed the sufferings it endured and suggested guidelines for conduct of faith for pastors, ministers, and the faithful. The letter affirmed: “The ordinance will create more problems and inconveniences for the Church and, in particular, for the assemblies for cult.” Nevertheless, the application of the ordinance would risk a fail to stop the movement of domestic Churches. For more thirty years, they have survived without recognizance of the State. They continue to survive, although the new dispositions established will lend local authorities legal authority to oppose and persecute domestic Churches of Evangelical Christianity. Facing this tragedy, the Alicante, in this situation, called on members of the Churches to live faith, praying the Lord to accord His Church support and protection.

Remarks on the Legislative Ordinance by Patriarch Thich Quang Do

After more than one and a half year under residence surveillance, the Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, in an interview with RFA correspondent Y Lan on November 22, 2004, expressed his views on the policy of the State on religions, in general, and the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church in particular. He specified that the Ordinance on religions of January 16, 2004 is in essence “a higher noose” on the religions. It tightens stricter control on religions and beliefs. Everything must be applied for and permission would be granted. It is a privilege. The State reserves the authority to grant favor at will. Regulations are applied even on the commonest religious practice. One must apply even for permission to perform a session of saying of prayers for peace for one’s family or a recital of “sutra” of a monk in one’s home. As regards Buddhism, the administration stilt uses vile tricks to divide the Unified Buddhist Church and other Buddhist Churches, and defames the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church, blaming it for not joining the State-sponsored Vietnam Buddhist Church. Worse still, this administration slanderously labels members of the Unified Church as counterinsurgents. The President of the Institute for the Propagation of Buddhist Faith insisted that the Church and its members would only wish to follow the traditional legitimate worship of Buddhism of the country. In any situation, a Buddhist has to obey the law and practice non -violence and the Church will ever be able to relive its activities. 

Comments on the Legislative Ordinance by three Catholic Priests

After the promulgation of the ordinance, personalities interested in the matter of religion showed reluctance as the law does not bring any hope for change. Typical were the remarks by three reputed Catholic priests, the Reverend Chan Tin, the Reverend Nguyen Huu Giai, and the Reverend Phan Van Loi. In bitter terms, they named it “an arbitrary piece of law that is used to oppress religions."  A brief examination of the text suffices to find out that the law is only an instrument the State creates to oppress the people on the religious plane. The rights of man to religious freedom are stifled. The law imposes rules and regulations on all religious activities. They are all conditioned by the fussy control of the State. As a matter of fact, the quasi-totality of the law aims to limit at the maximum not only the rights to religious freedom but also disable certain civil rights of the citizen It is in serious violation of religious freedom, an unalienable and fundamental right that the Constitution and international lass recognize. The ordinance limits or neutralizes religious freedom.”  In fact, 36 of the 41 articles of the law prescribe strict measures and unfavorable conditions under which a Church lives and operates.         

The Ordinance calls to mind at the very first instance the general principle of the Constitution on religious freedom: “The citizen has the right to be possessed of freedom of belief and religion, to adhere to or not to adhere to a religion. The State guarantees the freedom of belief and religion of the citizens. No one can infringe on this right.” In the light of this article, not a word limits the right to religious freedom. Nevertheless, all 36 articles that follow it relate rules and regulations to the applications of the law. This string of articles form the substance of the law containing almost all forms of limitation that contradict the principle pronounced in the first article. These 36 articles constitute a range of rules and regulations conditioning religious activities. They not only contradict Article 1 of the Ordinance itself but also the policy of religious freedom proclaimed by the Constitution. In all, the perfidious tactic of the State and that is true, for the last decades has been and will even be more perfidious in the near future when the law takes effect.  

      The Consequences

If the ordinance is applied, innumerable religious activities will fall under the hatchet of the law for not having registered or for lack of permission or failure to comply with the regulations for authorization. Activities such as parties of prayers at the residence, missionary visits outside the places of residence, installation of Web sites of religious character, printing of religious documents, and or any other cultural, charitable, educational, and humanitarian activities, and so on are al subject to authorization. They are all commonly justified activities that believers of almost all countries of the world can perform without either prior authorization or requirements such as level of education. They are never fined because of practicing a faith.  The Vietnamese believers, on the contrary, can only perform religious activities with explicit permission, if not, they are charged with violation of the law, and thus are liable to arrest and imprisonment.  

One of other absurdities of the ordinance remerges: Any religious and missionary activity of Church members is subject to application for authorization while members of the Communist Party and followers enjoy total freedom to propagate their doctrine and perform freely fetes and ceremonies praising their party and leadership.  Not only do they have this authority at will to do this, not t but they also have the authority to compel others to study their doctrine and observe their ideological principles. Are all citizens equal before the law? Does it conform to reason when the Communists only represent an infinite minority (2%) of the population while the adepts of religions tremendously outnumbered them (30% for the Buddhists, 8% for the Christians, 4% for the Caodaists, and 3% for the Hoa Hao Buddhists)? This inequality is an undeniable proof that the State that we actually serve is the State of the Communists, and not the State of the people and for the people.

     An Instrument of Repression

In the past, the laws on the religion derived from directives and resolutions of the Party. The Prime Minister promulgated most degrees, and the Bureau of Religious Affairs issued decisions. For the first time, a piece of law on religions was prepared by the Bureau of Religious Affairs, passed, and then promulgated by the National Assembly. This legislative law bears the title “Ordnance on Beliefs and Religions.” To the reluctance of public opinion, the ordnance brings no change. There are mere repetitions of politically-tainted provisions emanating from outmoded ideological precepts. They are mostly not examined in the light of sound judgment and expertise.  Justified religious activities are attributed to as illegal and subject to police “manu militari.” One wonders to what extent this police policy will prevail when the ordinance takes into effect. 

   

There is virtually no change. Parties for prayers of independent Evangelical Christian congregations are repressed and dispersed by the police. Pastors and adepts faced beating, arrest and imprisonment of the organizers. In the provinces of Son La, Lai Chau, Central Highlands, and other regions, the police confiscated Bibles, prayer-books. Assemblies for prayers of the Catholics are interdicted. Oppression on the religions is increasingly unbearable. Now the State mobilizes even the National Assembly, which is the supreme legislative organ of the nation, to edict an ordinance, not to relieve the burden of power that immerse the religion in anguish but also to obliterate its very existence. The State police policy stifles religious freedom in such an incredible manner that one wonders to what degree the religions will be oppressed! That is the reason people are in full communion with Cardinal Pham Minh Man when he declares “It’s better not to promulgate that ordinance.”

Implementation of the Legislative Ordinance

Unrest was pervasive. Dissent of believers of all faiths against State religious oppression and repression surged. Disputes over land between the State and the Roman Catholic Church grew increasingly tense. On November 8, 2012, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung issued the Decree 92 implementing the Ordinance on Religions. The chapters of the decree outlining what activities religious groups must register with the authorities. The Paris-based Buddhist Information Bureau asserted that the newly-issued decree would “give the authorities broader leeway to sanction and restrict religious activities. It adds to the framework of legislation a “veneer of legality “with which the policy of religious repression planned at the highest levels of the Communist Party and State would be effectively executed.” The decree spells out directives and measures for implementing the Ordinance on Beliefs and Religions with provisions governing religious practices of all faiths. It specifically lays out procedures by which religious organizations can register the clergy and laity's religious activities and the operation at the places of worship and procedures for application for official authorization. In addition to preserving the restrictive provisions of its predecessor, the decree adds new obligations and vaguely worded provisions that give the authorities greater power over the administration of religious activities.

On November 8, 2012, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung issued the Decree 92 on Beliefs and Religions. The new piece of law gives the administration greater control people's beliefs and religious freedom as it will give the authorities broader leeway to sanction and restrict religious activities. The decree adds to the framework of legislation used to give a "veneer of legality “to policy of religious repression, planned at the highest levels of the Communist Party and administration, and methodically implemented the existing policy of beliefs and religions  throughout the country, which aims to crash all dependent religious movements and place religions under strict Communist Party control. It spells out, in particular, directives and measures for implementing the Ordinance on Beliefs and Religions governing religious practices. It lays out procedures by which religious organizations can register their activities, places of worship, and clerics to operate openly to apply for official recognition. In addition, it preserves the restrictive provisions of its predecessor, adds new obligations worded provisions that give the authorities greater powers over religions