UNADFI Before the Courts

The judgment delivered at the end of this trial demonstrates that the whole task of educating people to think intelligently still remains entirely to be done, illustrated by the fallacious (and appalling) reasoning of this court (“The associations do not have a purpose contrary to the laws of the Republic… since the 2001 law came to strengthen the repression of cults”! Why not, then: “This criminal enterprise is not illegal since it was set up in the form of a limited company whose creation the government supports because it benefits the economy”?)

The Paris TGI dismisses the plaintiffs seeking the dissolution of UNADFI

PARIS, 14 Dec 2005 11:39 (AFP)

The Paris tribunal de grande instance (TGI) has dismissed a collective of lawyers and several plaintiffs who sought the dissolution of UNADFI, which specialises in information on cults, and ordered them to pay it damages, it was learned on Wednesday.

A collective of lawyers linked to the association “Cap pour la liberté de conscience” had summoned the Union nationale des associations de défense des familles et de l’individu, seeking its dissolution and accusing it of being “a thought police”.

The collective also sought damages for a dozen people, members or relatives of movements such as the Church of Scientology or the Catholic-inspired cult IVI, who allegedly suffered harm linked to denunciations by UNADFI.

The 1st chamber of the TGI, presided over by Bernard Valette, dismissed them.

“It cannot seriously be maintained that the said associations (that is, UNADFI and its Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie branch — ed.) have a purpose contrary to the laws of the Republic when the law of 12 June 2001 came to strengthen the prevention and repression of cult movements infringing human rights and fundamental freedoms,” the judgment notes.

“Nor has it been shown that the associations developed unlawful activities contrary to their respective statutes,” the judgment adds.

The claims for damages were also rejected, the court even holding that it was UNADFI and its Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie branch that should be compensated.

Indeed, “it appears that the totally unfounded implication of the associations (…), going, not without bad faith, so far as to seek their dissolution, damages their honour and their reputation,” the court held.

It ordered the plaintiffs to pay 10,000 euros in damages to each of the associations “for abusive proceedings” and to publish the judgment in eight newspapers. They must also pay each of the two associations 5,000 euros in legal costs.

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3226,36-722493@51-722588,0.html

An offensive by cult movements fails before the Paris criminal court

LE MONDE | 17.12.05 | 12:51, updated 17.12.05 | 14:38

The Union nationale des associations de défense de la famille et de l’individu (UNADFI), which specialises in information on cults, has just won a judicial victory. In a judgment delivered on Wednesday 14 December, the Paris tribunal de grande instance condemned for “abusive proceedings” a collective of individuals and associations who were seeking its dissolution on the ground that its action infringed freedom of conscience.

Recognised as being of public utility since 1996, UNADFI has always been associated with government action against cults. It has notably been authorised to join proceedings as a civil party in cases involving cult movements and has obtained accreditation from the Ministry of National Education among the associations which “extend the action of public education.”

At the hearing on 20 September, the collective’s lawyers had cited several examples of the “excesses” attributed to UNADFI. Relying on the testimony of individuals, reporting denunciations to an employer of an employee’s membership of a cult movement, or “attestations” issued by UNADFI on the “danger” represented by the proximity of one or other member of a couple in divorce proceedings to this or that movement of the cult nebula, the civil parties’ lawyers considered that this association regularly overstepped its information role to take on that of “grand inquisitor”, “annex of the Renseignements généraux” or “thought police”. “UNADFI denounces, insinuates, labels!” exclaimed Me Gérard Ducrey. “For it, the law of suspects still exists. When it defends human rights, it is like when the Soviet Union defended the right of psychiatric asylum!”

The reply came from Me Michel Tubiana, former president of the Ligue des droits de l’homme, who was defending UNADFI. “The appearance, in this debate, is individual stories, sometimes tragic ones. The reality is quite different. This is an offensive by the Church of Scientology, by IVI (listed in France under the label of healing cult) and by all those who sing the praises of these movements whose cult practices we denounce,” he declared. To his opponents, who had invoked the protection of the 1901 law on associations and the 1905 law on the separation of Churches and State, Me Tubiana observed: “Freedom has a price: transparency and publicity. Now, what all the plaintiffs here have in common is that they conceal themselves. UNADFI’s role is precisely to provide information on the associations to which they belong and which they hide.”

In its judgment, the court dismisses all the individuals, holding that the wrongful acts they attribute to UNADFI are not made out, and finds that their request for the association’s dissolution damages its “honour” and “reputation”. It orders them to pay 10,000 euros to UNADFI and its Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie regional branch in damages for “abusive proceedings”, 5,000 euros in legal costs, and to publish extracts of its judgment in eight newspapers. The collective of associations and individuals has announced its intention to appeal.

Pascale Robert-Diard

The methods of an anti-cult association challenged in court

LE MONDE | 23.09.05 | 10:58, updated 23.09.05 | 11:27

The setting was judicial, but it was a political debate that occupied the 1st civil chamber of the Paris court on Tuesday 20 September. A collective of individuals and associations linked to Cap, a movement for the “defence of freedom of conscience”, was suing the Union nationale des associations de défense de la famille et de l’individu (UNADFI), which specialises in information on cults and whose dissolution they are seeking.

“Armed wing of the State”, “annex of the Renseignements généraux”, “Big Brother” or “grand inquisitor”: there was no shortage of expressions at the hearing to denounce the methods of UNADFI and its branches, accused of seeking to institute a “thought police” in matters of religious or philosophical conviction.

Before a large audience won over to their cause, the collective’s lawyers cited several examples of the “excesses” attributed to the association. Where does information against the proselytism of cult movements end, and where does “informing” begin? To hear the accounts given by the lawyers, it appears that the line is not always respected by UNADFI or, at the very least, by those who claim to act in its name.

“UNADFI DENOUNCES, INSINUATES, LABELS”

The parents of a child with leukaemia placed in police custody and sent before the court for failure to provide care, after an acquaintance of the family denounced to the authorities the couple’s membership of IVI, a religious movement listed in France under the label of healing cult; an anonymous letter sent to an employer to inform him that one of his employees belonged to a cult movement; divorce proceedings in which “attestations” from UNADFI are filed on the “danger” represented by the proximity of one or other member of the couple to this or that association of the cult nebula: so many examples which, in the words of one of the lawyers, constitute “textbook cases of trials of intent”.

“It is always the same story: UNADFI denounces, insinuates, labels. For it, the law of suspects still exists. When UNADFI defends human rights, it is like when the Soviet Union defended the right of psychiatric asylum!” observed Me Gérard Ducrey. “The appearance, in this debate, is individual stories, sometimes tragic. The reality is quite different. This is an offensive by the Church of Scientology, by IVI and by all those who sing the praises of the movements whose cult practices we denounce,” observed Me Michel Tubiana, former president of the Ligue des droits de l’homme and UNADFI’s lawyer.

To his opponents, who had called to the rescue the great principles of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and brandished the venerable old ladies of the Republic (the 1901 law on freedom of association and the 1905 law on the separation of Churches and State) Me Tubiana replied: “Freedom has a price: transparency and publicity. Now, what all the plaintiffs here have in common is that they conceal themselves. They advance with masked faces. UNADFI’s role is precisely to provide information on the associations to which one or other of them belongs and which they hide. What they have come to ask the court is to silence us!”

For the judges’ benefit, Me Tubiana added: “You have no jurisdiction to enter this debate, which is whether or not, in France, the government is pursuing a mad policy of combating cults.” Judgment on 15 November.

Pascale Robert-Diard

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3226,36-691983@51-646967,0.html

Cults

The revolt of the suspects

Guillaume Riffaud

How can cults be fought without harming religious freedom? That is the question raised by the trial under way before the Paris tribunal de grande instance. The case pits a dozen people, with no direct link between them, against UNADFI (Union nationale des associations de défense des familles et de l’individu), an association fighting cults. Among the plaintiffs is Jacques Dubreuil, a yoga teacher in Brittany who in 1994 found himself suspected (through the press) of being close to the Order of the Solar Temple. Rumour, bankruptcy. Jacques Dubreuil lost everything. Might UNADFI, meaning well, sometimes do too much? Witness its website, which accuses the Saint-Jean community (welcomed, however, by many bishops of France) of “sexual abuse, rapes and very numerous homosexual deviations”. If this suspicion is founded, one may be surprised that no evidence is put forward by the association. If not, one wonders about the publication of such grave accusations.

Before the Paris court, the lawyers for the plaintiffs linked to the association Cap pour la liberté de conscience are claiming damages and the dissolution of the association. Among these plaintiffs are people close to Scientology and to the Catholic-inspired movement IVI. UNADFI’s lawyer, Michel Tubiana, ex-president of the Ligue des droits de l’homme, replies: “Can it be forbidden to say what one thinks of a religion or a spiritual movement? Admittedly, there is sometimes the risk of too great a distrust: some members of UNADFI suffer from seeing their relatives victims of cults. But is it not absolutely necessary that critical associations should exist to observe and warn?” And to those who think that this is the State’s role, Gilles Bottine, secretary-general of MIVILUDES (Interministerial Mission for Vigilance and Combat against dérives sectaires), recalls that “the State neither recognises nor subsidises any religion. There is no legal definition of what a cult is. We take suffering into account, but we intervene only where there is an infringement of fundamental freedoms, proven disturbances of public order, or any breach of the laws. That is the condition of laïcité and of religious freedom.”

A judgment is expected on 15 November. It will be quite delicate

http://www.lepoint.fr/societe/document.html?did=168221

UNADFI Before the Courts

Sources