RELIGIOUS POLICY—THE CHARACTER (III)

 Religious Policy-The Character

By Van Nguyen




 On December 25, 2002, Msgr. Pham Minh Man, Archbishop of Ho Chi Minh City, sent the following letter to the Fourth National Congress of the Committee of Union of Catholicism (formerly Committee of Union of Catholic Patriots).  Comments on the task of the committee and a list of serious critics on social evils in the actual Vietnamese society and the political monopoly of power of the regime that governs it are noticeable. (EDA 368, February 1, 2003)

          To Fr. Nguyen Tan Khoa, President of the Committee

          of Union of Catholicism and the representatives at the 4th Congress of  Vietnamese Catholics for the edification and defense of the Fatherland

      Thank sincerely for the invitation to the Congress that you sent to me. First of all, I send my salutations and wish for peace from Christ to all representatives. My pastoral task is not permitting me to come to participate in the congress. By the intermediary of this letter, I desire to send to all participants these several opinions and, thereby, I would contribute to the prospective task of edification of the country and defense of the fatherland in the actual situation.

      To serve man is the supreme objective of all organizations and social institutions. This affirmation determines man as the object of interest as well as the final goal of all cultural, economic, and social action in the national community. In effect, does it not express the fundamental truth concerning human dignity? It is from this cause of truth are derived the pressing needs and exigencies that should be met with in the actual circumstances whereby we edify a more human society in Vietnam, our fatherland. These needs and exigencies present two tasks that are as follows:

      I. Eliminate corrupt practices of the actual society

      1. Put into work the human values that will permit all citizens to receive welfare, to live in independence, freedom, and happiness in conformity with the dignity as man.

      2- Eliminate the most serious corrupt practices, the alienation of man from the dignity as Man

      Alienation is a phenomenon that deprives of man his dignity. This phenomenon appears and grows in the actual society:     

      - As the habit of consumption immerses man in the circle of artificial and delusive satisfactions;

    

      -as work is organized in this manner, maximum of benefits will be practically translated into means devoid of the consciousness of improving the lives and progress of the workers.

    -as one reverses means to an end, and as man is considered the object of the development, he becomes a means of production;

     -as liberty becomes the right to do what one pleases, it produces  immediate advantage for one’s own , foe one’s own  group, for one’s  own place while liberty  is the right to accomplish what conscience authorizes one to accomplish one’s  task for the common good, and for the interests of the actual generation and the generations to come. When one alienates oneself from human dignity, liberty is mere opportunism or arbitrary means granted by those who hold power and force. Liberty as such, instead of bringing peace, joy, and happiness to everyone, will risk creating accumulations for injustices for the society.

     

    II. Eliminate the second of the most serious social corrupt practices, an unjust and alienating regime.

     The system "apply for-approval" is typical of an unjust and alienating regime. It is the generator of injustices and rights alienation for the following reasons:

     -The system "apply for-approval" transforms the rights of the citizen to liberty into a slavery submission to the power held by the State, the power with which the State decides as it pleases, to bestow the citizens of the country a favor under the form of authorization. Thus, this system deprives the citizens of the country of their liberty, and, at the same time, it transforms the State of the people; from the people, and by the people into a State of slaves at the service of a suzerain master who holds in his hands the rights of the citizens of the country and bestows them its favor as he pleases and in accordance with his whims and wishes.

      -According to the press, it is that system "apply for-approval" that provokes the evasion from the public funds 50% of financial resources and 50% of what remains, which disappeared right at the time the funds were granted. That means that the small minority of those who hold force and power benefit from 75% of the public funds of the nation and only 25% is provided for more than 70 million people. Such a reality creates serious instances of injustices in the society, and thus never ceases to enlarge the gap that separates the rich and the poor in the interior of our people. The same is true with the spread of systemic peculation at the high echelon of the bureaucracy that rages in our society. It is an immensely insurmountable obstacle to the development of the country and an impediment to the promotion for the dignity of man to be a value.

     II. Put into practicethe  human dignity to render the society ever more human

     1- Put into practice the respect for the  human dignity and the hu

     This task requires that all organs and all institutions, in their social relations, pay full attention to and respect for Man. The task should be done at the heart all cultural, economic, and social activities, that is, all activities should be oriented toward the development and progress of mankind and coordinated within  an integral body, spirit and soul, the three dimensions that constitutes the dignity and personality of man. It seems that the educational system, in our actual society, is inclined to move toward the transmission of specialized knowledge rather  than the development of the human person. An orientation as such risks forming generations of destitute, crippled, and handicapped people for the nation.

      2- Social development and human progress must be founded on the Truth

      A society can be considered as orderly and humanly oriented only when it is founded on the truth. The base truth lies in the human relations. That is, all men are treated equally as man. It requires that one renounce discriminations—partial treatments-- that one eliminates all forms of dictatorship and that one repudiate dishonesty and intrigues—the vices that outspread nowadays in all domains of the life of man and society.

      3- Make a value the spirit of solidarity in the national community

      The spirit of solidarity can only be solidly edified and developed on the base of the respect for man and his rights, the respect for his legitimate independence, the respect for the right to self-determination of the civil organization, and the respect for the moral values of our cultural traditions. The spirit of solidarity must be placed above the interests of any particular organizations and groups. It should be put into practice to the service of the lasting development, of the constant progress of man, and of the family and the society.

      4- Make a value the spirit of complementarity in all social organizations

     The edification, solidarity and union in the bosom of the nation could only bear fruit in so far as al social organizations will put into action the spirit of complementarity. That is the characteristic of the true organization whereby the association at the superior level should not interfere in the internal affairs of the one at the inferior level and encroach on its competency and autonomy. On the contrary, it coordinates its own activities with those of other social organizations at the lower levels. In the interior of all social organizations the practice of the spirit of complementarity, all citizens, civil associations, religious or not, and without distinction of classes, are free to take initiatives to  conduct their activities for the service of the development and progress of man and the family, and of the reinforcement  of juridical foundations of the nation. The spirit of complementarity prevents any organization or social collectivity, be it the highest one, such as the State, from the monopoly of power as far as the national development is concerned, This axiom construes the common task of the entire people and of diverse social components of the national community. Besides, the monopoly of power only leads to dictatorship, absolutism, bureaucracy, protectionism, oppression and injustice—the calamities that debase human dignity and raise obstacles to the development of the country.

      Complementarity, as it is conceived above, is the foundation necessary for the edification of a democratic society and a State of the people, from the people, and to the service of the people. Without this foundation, the State, instead of being an organization to the service of the people, becomes an apparatus of tyrannical domination while the people, instead of benefitting the statute of a master, is no more than a blind and passive instrument to the service of this apparatus. A reversal of this epithet alienates man from human dignity and disintegrates the society,

      5- Make a value the consciousness of the public good and the will to serve

      First of all, the consciousness of the common good is the necessary condition to the exercise of the right to liberty s of the citizen, the making of human dignity a value. From the cause of reason, the service to the common good requires that tasks are to be organized by the State. The latter core administration must create conditions which guarantee the rights of every citizen and every social organization to benefit from freedom and the dignity as man, which are values essential to the development of the country.  Also, it must eliminate unjust regulations and measures that are contrary to the cultural traditions of our nation. The regime "apply for-approval" is a type-example of unjust regulation. A million and more abortions that take place every year results from the typical example of a measure that is contrary to the moral principles whose past and present consequences have endangered our nation in an uncertain future.

        I think that the Catholics wish that the representatives contribute to the edification and defense of the fatherland in an appropriate manner, according to conscience and in conformity with the commitments of the Catholics, along with other motive-drives that help to enrich the culture and the spiritual forces of the Vietnamese people. I wish your Congress a New Year and new progress and acquirements.

Sincerely,”

RELIGIOUS POLICY—THE CHARACTER (II)

Religious Policy-The Characyrt

By Van Nguyen 






Demands from Religious Dignitaries

On December 27, 2000, four religious dignitaries, the Reverend Nguyen Van Ly of the Archdiocese of Hue, the Reverend Chan Tun of the Redemptorits Order in Saigon, the Most Venerable Thich Thien Hanh of the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church, and the Honorable Le Quang Liem, chairman of the Elders Council of Pure Hoa Hao Buddhism, signed in a declaration tabulating the consequences resulting from the repressive policy on religions of the Communist Party of Vietnam and demanding for the respect for the rights to religious freedom.,  

“Since its conquest of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975, the Communist Party of Vietnam has imposed an inhuman policy as regards the religions of the country.

--Numerous institutions and proprieties belonging to diverse religions—Cao Dai, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hoa Hao Buddhism, and the Evangelical Christianity-- have been shamelessly confiscated, nationalized, and placed at the disposition of the communist rule.

--Numerous documents of judicial character have been promulgated to hog-tie, limit, and suppress religious activities in an inconceivable manner that has never been seen in the history of the country

--Numerous maneuvers of amalgam and of false accusations have been finagled to assign to house surveillance and imprisonment religious leaders who oppose the repressive and destructive religious policy that has been pursued from 1975 until these days.  

 --Numerous maneuvers of intimidation have been perpetuated to undermine the religions from within, to divide their ranks and politicize their objectives such as revealed from hidden schemes operated within the Churches --Cao Dai, Roman Catholicism, Evangelical Christianity, and Buddhism, notably the crafty design that splits up the Buddhist Church into two separate sects, the Buddhist Church of Vietnam and the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church. Most recently, in 1999, the five million Hoa Hao Buddhists ought to endure repression under the direction of a puppet “Commission of Representatives” consisting of 11 members of the Communist Part created by the authorities. This is a monstrous anomaly that has never been seen in the history of religions.  

Facing this cruel policy, which is aimed to strangle the religions, all the Churches of Vietnam have persistently perused a non-violence resistance to demand for the right to religious freedom and have been determined to struggle until they obtain genuine religious freedom as have the Churches in the vast majority of civilized countries in the world.

That is why, nowadays, in line with progressive movements for the rights of the human person, we, the signatories to this declaration, believe that time has come to launch appeal to demand the Vietnamese communist authorities  

1.To scrupulously respect the right to veritable religious freedom in such essential domains as the total freedom and independence of religious leaders in the choice of faith, in the formation and the nomination of priests and in the performance of their own responsibilities in accordance with the needs and spiritual tenets suitable to each faith; to respect the right to religious faith of all Vietnamese citizens by suppressing from now on any mention to religious entity of a citizen in administrative documents so that the citizen could enjoy total peace with regard to regions identity, and no one would see himself discriminated because of religious faith and would enjoy all favorable conditions to live his faith and will no longer suffer repression with such discriminatory measures in the situation as he has been nowadays.                                                                                                                                  

2. To restitute the rights to ownership to diverse Churches their institutions and properties which, for 25 years, have been confiscated, nationalized, and used as properties of the State, or “ceded” to the State under coercion  or  by likely unreliable documents that still in existence or may be lost due to the war. In the latter case, the population should stand as a witness to judge the degree of reliability of the documents and verify the origin of the documents accordingly.  

3.To put an end to crafty maneuvers or posts aiming at stifling and strangling the religions; to put an end to all attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of the religions; to dissolve diverse State-created committees in all forms that operate abnormally and that are only ancillary instruments of the communist State.   

4. To free without condition the religious, seminarians, religious personalities already condemned or still imprisoned in detention centers.

5. To respect diverse provisions of the International Human Rights Convention of September 24, 1982, the covenant to which the Communist State of Vietnam has been admitted membership.”

As far as the laws on religions are concerned, the International Buddhist Information Bureau in Paris said recent decree-laws further lend hand to the authorities to impose stricter control on beliefs and religions in a country where religious activities are solely monitored in places where religious groups function under government-directed executive boards. The government recognizes 31 religions representing 11 diverse religions including the Buddhist Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Evangelical Christian Churches, (State-created) Cao Dai, and (State-created Hoa Hao Buddhism. Non-sanctioned religious groups such as the Christian House Churches or various sects of the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church are outlawed. The Patriarch of the Vietnam Unified Buddhist Church Thich Quang Do called these decrees the “harsh” police measures, which are destined to curtail religious freedom in the country.

The authorities have systematically repressed Buddhist organizations since the North Vietnamese took control of the South in 1975. Religious laws and policies are abounding with empty rhetoric and promises. There is nothing but vain hope. Successive policies by the Communist Party and Government of Vietnam generally do not match up realities, if not implacable and mandatory. They are coercive, imposing rules and regulations on the religion, forcing the believers to serve the political goals set forth by the Communist leadership. Inconsistent and confusing decisions, orders, and decrees either by the Party or the government succeed one after another but produce no change. The inconsistency and confusion inherent in the laws substantiate complex difficulties, popular conflicts, and opposition, thus leading to conflict and unrest.  As a consequence, the Ninth Congress and the Seventh Plenum of the Communist Party, drawing lessons from the troubles in the Central Highlands, tried to modify the policy on religion, hoping to remedy the situation. The ordinance promulgated by the National Assembly and the decree by the prime minister that followed equally failed to meet with the needs of all Churches and the aspirations of the laity of all faiths, however.

RELIGIOUS POLICY—THE CHARACTER

Religious Policy-The Character

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.

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