Religious Policy-The Character
By Van Nguyen
Public Policy versus Internal Policy
By Van Nguyen
Public Policy versus Internal Policy
Religious persecution is increasing pervasive as
ever. The report by the Commission of Religious Freedom of Evangelical
Alliance, Ottawa, Canada, on January 27, 2000 focuses on uncivil infringement
on religious liberty in the western mountainous region where millions of new
converts of Christianity are subject to harsh persecution. It particularly
stresses the characteristics of religious policy that produces the paradigm of
two distinct policies described as “official or public policy’ and “internal
policy.” to explain the failure of Communist Vietnam in the domain of human
rights in its entirety.
The "public policy" is mainly an ensemble
of derivatives from a number of provisions in the Constitution, which proclaim
ostensibly religious freedom in an inconsistent manner, and based on successive
directives of the Politburo and decrees of the government. In appearance, it
heightens the legitimacy of religious freedom and guarantees the rights to
exercise religious freedom of the citizen. Contrarily, it limits in a draconian
manner religious freedom and tolerates numerous patent measures as far as the
power vested in the officials in charge of religious is concerned. The control on the religious life of the
believers of different confessions is equivocally untenable. This "public
policy" is cleverly put into action by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
the Fatherland Front, the Bureau of Religious Affairs, and the mass media
services. The propaganda machinery of the State, the mouthpiece of the regime,
publicizes the State “achievements in areas of human rights and religious
freedom.” As in a refrain, it praises
the tasks of State agencies and organizations and defends them against any
charges they may commit. Still, the security police and courts of justice are
instrumental in this regard to protect the regime. Prisoners of conscience in
Vietnam, who advocate and defend rights, are only criminals as foreseen by
unclear provisions of the laws.
The “public
policy” is manipulated in conjunction with the draconian "internal
policy" inspired from Marxist orthodoxy on the religion. Religion is the
opium of the people. It must be eradicated with whatever means necessary as it
should be. The policy is as mischievous as dubious. Not only does it lead to a
deceitful application of the "official policy," but it also
authorizes the State to forcefully threaten, harass, and persecute the
believers. The actual justification of this "internal policy" is to
heighten vigilance against the religion which is viewed as the avant-garde
force of hostile elements. It derives from an international plot instigated by
the enemies of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam in the gist of the gradual
development of "peaceful evolution.” The approach is designed to
ultimately overthrow the “Revolution” --the Communist regime. The aims of that
peaceful evolution are labeled as advocacy for "democracy, human rights,
and religious liberty." As in guerrilla warfare, one makes arrows from
every kind of wood. The power of the "internal policy" is put into
action particularly within the long-lasting and enduring campaign to "stop
and distill" the Christian movement, especially the Christians of ethnic
minorities by means of extra-judiciary methods of an unbelievable cruelty.
Independent sects of Cao Dai, Hoa Hao, and the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church
suffer intolerance. The Roman Catholic Church is not an exception.
It is not,
then, the question to apply pressure on the Communist administration in Vietnam
in order that one could prevent it from carrying out in certain localities its
"public policy." This cannot be realized as long as the reign of the
"internal policy" coexists. Those democratic countries that are
respectful for human rights and that are generous donor partners of bilateral
and multilateral partners have difficulties to counteract this cruel and
unacceptable policy. Only when Communist Vietnam understands that it risks to
suffer severe consequences on the international plane could it accordingly
pursue the “reasonable policy" that is conceivable to the world.
In practice, the "internal policy" is
artfully put into action by various powerful governmental organisms that act as
the right arm of the Communist Party of Vietnam. That policy has nothing to do
with religious liberty as defined by the Constitution. It is implied in diverse
laws and decrees and protected by the security police, diverse administrative
authorities, and the courts of justice. Its promoters and guardians are the
Party, the Bureau of Religious Affairs, and all the special units of the
Ministry of Public Security. Whoever reveals the true nature of that
"internal policy" and its manifestations is accused of being a
reactionary, and thus, the enemy of the Vietnamese “Revolution” --the Communist regime--, and a maniac
contracting mental breakdown, or a lawbreaker nourishing dark schemes against
Vietnam. Fr. Nguyen Van Ly frankly
affirmed that there is no religious liberty in Vietnam. His statement costs him
a long penalty in prison for what is described as "crime against the
State." This "internal policy" contradicts in all points the
"public policy" in that it is applied secretly and is followed by the
reinforcement of the law of organs of the security that is extra-judiciary and
extremely severe. Appeals to justice of
the victims of the "internal policy" are ignored, negated, or
stifled. Some petitioners who lay claims
on injustices beside competent authorities are isolated. Others are targeted
with violence. Still, others suffer extra-judiciary punishments. Flagrant
abuses against religious freedom, in most cases, are clearly proven. The
authorities nevertheless attribute them as extortions. Certainly, there are
incompetent officials who go astray, acting erroneously in rare instances in
certain isolated and distant localities. They are those who undoubtedly have
not understood the lines of the "public policy." This explanation
would satisfy a number of people, including some lenient diplomats. Their
vision of the world would not offer a place for a political system that acts
with deliberate deception. The memory of victims of tragic persecution will
never fade, if we judge a person or an incident on the appearance.
The “internal
policy,” the flip side to the coin, necessarily implements the "public
policy." It is revealed in most instances. In a letter addressed to the
prime minister and the Bureau of Religious Affairs in May 2002, the leaders of
the Christian Evangelical Churches of Vietnam (North) complained that since 1988
it had not been authorized to hold a general assembly. Nevertheless, the
authorities had repeatedly prevented the Church from carrying out its mission
although it is officially recognized and its rights as a religion is guaranteed
by the Constitution. The "public policy" proves itself a policy of
deceit. The reason for which a general assembly had not been authorized results
from the fact the authorities had not committed to carrying out guarantees as
promised by the "public policy," Their aim is to exert control on the
superior hierarchy of the Church, instead.
Leaders of the Evangelical Christian Churches of Vietnam (North) met
with difficulty. H'mong Christians of the provinces of the Northwest was
forbidden to contact with their leaders in November 2002. Regardless of
impediments, the Church was successful to incorporate its factions into an
institution, operating under the law, which reality made the authorities
furious.
Persecution persists. Religious intolerance with
harsh treatment against the domestic Churches has ever developed with
harassment, arrest, oppression, and repression that end with physical brutality
and cold persecution. It would take innumerable pages to describe the realities
that have happened to the believers under the execution of the double policy on
religion. The "public policy" appears in every letter in its
Constitution, which ostensibly guarantees religious liberty of the citizen. Its
application, however, adheres closely to the principles of Marxist orthodoxy
according to which the State assumes every power to examine the legitimacy of a
religion and exercise control on all religious faiths.
The Communist Party of Vietnam and State are
empowered constitutionally to decide if such or such religious group is worthy
of such legitimacy and co-opts the direction for such or such religious
congregation accordingly. In the case of the Evangelical Christianity
community, the application of this policy excludes the majority of believers.
To the groups that the State considers as legal and that submits itself with
docility to the official policy, the State distills it with homeopathic and
hazardous instances a religious liberty. Authorities claim that they always do
things that are normal and right and that best serve the believers. Realities
prove the reverse. Vietnam’s records remain well inferior to international
criteria in this in the domain of human and civil rights. It even arrogantly
violates international accords, covenants and treaties by which it has pledged
to abide.
No comments:
Post a Comment