- Статьи
- World
- Miracle of postponement: the President of Estonia rejected the law against the EPC again
Miracle of postponement: the President of Estonia rejected the law against the EPC again
On July 3, Estonian President Alar Karis refused for the second time to sign legislative amendments against the local Orthodox Church. The parliament, by a majority vote, decided to give the church an ultimatum: either it breaks off ties with the Moscow Patriarchate, or it falls under a ban. However, according to the head of state, the amendments directly violate the Constitution. And now the parliament has a choice: either try to push this bill through against the will of the head of state, or take it back for revision. Details can be found in the Izvestia article.
Obstinate Karis
In April of this year, the Riigikogu (Parliament) Estonia approved legislative amendments that were supposed to put the local Orthodox Church in a desperate situation. She was required to sever all canonical ties with the Moscow Patriarchate within two months, threatening otherwise to be excluded from the register of legal entities, the seizure of churches and parish premises. All that remained was to get final permission from the President of Estonia, Alar Karis, but he suddenly refused to proclaim the law. There was a theory that the head of the Estonian state did not want to incur the wrath of Washington, because shortly before that, the Estonian Christian Orthodox Church had turned to US President Donald Trump for protection.
However, Alar Karis formulated his refusal in such a way as to make it clear that he is not at all opposed to tearing the Orthodox Church away from Moscow. However, the president is concerned that this will create a precedent on the basis of which it will be possible to persecute any other organization that is found to be under the influence of a foreign state. Therefore, he demanded that the bill be reworked, and the parliament agreed to fulfill this requirement.
On June 18, the Riigikogu again adopted amendments to the "Law on Churches and Parishes", making only cosmetic amendments to them. The result of the vote is unequivocal: 68 votes in favor and 17 against. The main changes are that this time the deadline for the ultimatum to break with the Moscow Patriarchate has been increased from two to six months. Another innovation is that it is specifically stipulated that the head of a religious denomination registered in Estonia cannot be a person who is prohibited from entering the territory of the state. This is more than a clear reference to the head of the Estonian Orthodox Christian Church, Metropolitan Eugene. At the beginning of last year, Evgeny was expelled from Estonia by the decision of the authorities, but he continues to lead the flock.
The tiny Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC) is happy to participate in the persecution of the EPCC. She is the main beneficiary of the government's persecution of the Russian Orthodox. The size of these two churches is incommensurable: the EAOC has about 100,000 parishioners (mainly local Russians and Russian speakers), and the EAOC, which is under the omophorion of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, has about 7,000 (mostly ethnic Estonians). And now they expect to adopt its parishes and flock in the event of a ban on the EHRC.
The Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church is headed by Metropolitan Stefan (Charalambidis), an ethnic Greek from Cyprus. In a conversation with the local press, he said: "We must take into account the threats directed against the Baltic states, including ours. We cannot allow a threat to state security to be created through a religious organization or under its cover."
The secondary presidential front
The Estonian authorities connected the British press to the attack on the rebellious church. The Daily Telegraph published an article titled "Russia uses nuns as spies to spread propaganda." The author of the article, James Rothwell, focused on the "exposure" of the nuns of the Stavropol convent in Pyukhtitsa, which is the most revered Orthodox monastery in the Baltic States. Rothwell cites the opinion of Estonian officials that Russia allegedly uses the Pyukhtitsky monastery as an instrument of espionage and propaganda, which, they say, contradicts the monastic vow of renunciation of all worldly things. "The Pyukhtitsky Monastery should not be considered only as a religious institution. He is also an ideological symbol of the "Russian world" in Estonia, where religion, nationalism and imperial nostalgia combine," Martin Tulit, head of the Department of Religion and Civil Society at the Ministry of Internal Affairs, categorically told Rothwell.
However, on July 3, President Alar Karis rejected for the second time the amendments to the "Law on Churches" and the "Law on International Sanctions" prepared by the Parliament as inconsistent with the Constitution of Estonia. "Both laws have an important purpose. However, this goal will not be achieved if, along with the necessary restrictions, the law introduces those that leave excessive room for interpretation and, ultimately, give rise to numerous legal disputes," the president noted. According to him, even in its revised form, the amendments "still contradict three articles of the Constitution and disproportionately restrict freedom of association and religion."
Karis believes that in their current form, the amendments will do more harm than good. "Influence activities should be prevented, but for this it is necessary to more precisely identify those foreign connections that are dangerous. The explanatory note to the law explicitly states that, in addition to regulating administrative relations, there is a desire to regulate the teaching of the church and religious rituals. There are other effective levers to combat influence activities, so such extensive intervention is not required," the president stressed. In addition, he is not satisfied that the concept of "threat" is defined so broadly in the amendments developed by the Parliament that, if applied literally, other religious denominations may also be banned in Estonia.
Karis' obstinacy caused outrage in the ruling coalition. In particular, Interior Minister Igor Taro (a member of the Estonia 200 party) sharply criticized the President. According to Taro, the president's action suggests that the head of state does not consider it necessary to separate the Orthodox Church from Moscow. "The purpose of the amendments to the Law on Churches and Parishes is to protect Estonia's security and religious freedom. By themselves, these changes do not lead to the prohibition of Orthodoxy or any other religion. The changes should eliminate a situation in which the Moscow Patriarchate, which justifies, defends and blesses the bloody war of aggression launched by Russia, could influence the activities of believers in Estonia and threaten the safety of other residents of the country," Taro stressed.
What are Karis' motives?
However, the Interior Minister has shown no desire to leave the Orthodox Church alone. "This means that we must once again look for constitutional opportunities to protect our believers from Russia's aggressive influence," Taro said. According to him, after the president's repeated veto, the Ministry of Internal Affairs will consult with the Parliament's legal commission. This Commission may propose to the Riigikogu either to adopt the law in its unchanged form, or to try again to amend its text in accordance with the recommendations of the head of State. In the first case, an interesting conflict is possible when the president and parliament enter into an open confrontation.
President of Estonia Alar Karis
Representatives of the Estonian opposition parties do not rule out that Karis has caught some new trends that have not yet been recognized in the government. "The balance of power in Europe and the world is beginning to change: Donald Trump is playing against the globalists, there are much more members of anti-globalist parties in the European Parliament today than in the last convocation. The question is when these changes will reach Estonia's domestic policy," says Alexander Chaplygin, a member of the Riigikogu from the opposition Centrist party. He does not rule out that reducing the influence of global globalism will put an end to aggressive attempts to suppress dissent in the EU countries.
However, the experts interviewed by Izvestia are more cautious. Political scientist Andrey Starikov, editor-in-chief of the portal Baltnews.com She believes that all Karis wants is for the discriminatory bill to be expressed in more streamlined terms. "The first and second editions of the amendments to the Law on Churches and Parishes, which encroached on the freedom of the EHRC, are too clumsily drafted, and the difference between them is so insignificant that they leave room for criticism. Accordingly, the Estonian Orthodox Christian Church has the opportunity to fight these amendments, challenge them in the courts, involving professional lawyers, citing violations of the Constitution, and file complaints with international authorities. As a result, the state may suffer serious image losses. This is exactly the prospect that President Karis is trying to avoid, who clearly sees that the bill is crude and unfinished," Starikov believes.
The expert adds that Karis fully shares the desire to eliminate Russian Orthodoxy in Estonia, but sees that the tools designed for this purpose have not yet been sufficiently developed. "The president does not reject the amendments in the bud, he only sends them for revision a second time. Therefore, they will continue to put pressure on the church, threatening to ban it if it refuses to leave for anti-Russian jurisdiction. However, I would not like to deprive people of hope with a peremptory assessment. The church is actively fighting, using all the mechanisms available to it, and in this case, it is important that with the second refusal of Karis, she will receive a few extra months of delay. Therefore, the leadership of the church and the faithful continue their struggle, hoping not so much for the sanity of the Estonian leadership as for a change in the international situation," Starikov emphasizes.
In turn, political scientist Alexander Nosovich, a specialist in the Baltic States, notes that it is still premature to talk about a change in both the international and domestic Estonian conjuncture in this case. "I also think that Karis is confused primarily by the fact that the anti-church bill is really unconstitutional and legally illiterate. In my opinion, the president is unhappy not so much with another act of discrimination against Estonian Russians, but rather with the fact that these amendments were drafted so carelessly that they could be challenged in European courts," says the expert.
However, he does not rule out that Karis noticed that the administration of Donald Trump declares its commitment to the protection of religious freedom and freedom of conscience. "This has already led to clashes between Vice President Vance and the leadership of some European countries. And in this case, it turns out that the Estonian persecutors of Orthodoxy are framing both their country and Karis personally, which does not suit him. I see quite rational actions by the Estonian President aimed at minimizing risks— both for myself and for the Republic of Estonia as a whole. The assumption that Karis was afraid of the wrath of the Trump administration and Vance is quite plausible," concludes Nosovich.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
