The Scientology organization reports constant victories in court.
Often their reports are false.
Here are a couple of examples of Scientology's systematic public deception.
Address of Ingo Heinemann's original German-language page
(last updated on November 15, 2000) from which this
translation came: http://www.ingo-heinemann.de/falsch5.htm
The Scientology organization continues to claim that it has been acknowledged as religion in Germany through 30 court judgments. These judgments, however, are nowhere to be found.
The Scientology organization does not only "redefine" speech, it also redefines judgments. In this manner a negative or insignificant court decision is presented as a great success. In most of those a simple trick is used: An individual sentence from the basis of the decision is quoted out of context. By doing that it cannot be discerned what the judgment was really about. What particularly cannot be discerned is what the process on the whole was about. The "tenor" of the judgment, that means the language of the judgment, is what makes the difference. There is not a single judgment which purports that Scientology is a religion or that Scientology is acknowledged as religion. There is not a single court process which concerns the acknowledgment of Scientology as religion. Considerations used in the basis of the a judgment can never have the same effect as the judgment itself. The basis of a judgment is where the court quite simply places a certain characteristic (e.g., as religion). But the end result does not necessarily depend on it. A court often errs on an individual point, but the final decision is right nonetheless.
In November 2000 the Scientology organization sent a fax to a number of church sect commissioners:
--- begin fax transcript (translation)Deutsches Büro für Menschenrechte Beauftragter für Sekten- und Weltanschauungsfragen der Diözese Regensburg z.Hd. Dipl-Theol. Hans Rückerl Roritzer Str. 12 93047 Regensburg per Fax: 0941-5839-402 Information: Current Court Decision concerning "employees' membership in Scientology" Ladies and Gentlemen, In the scope of your work you have come into contact with so-called "Scientology security statements." This method of alienating people from society has long ago been found illegitimate by a Munich court. The complete court decision can be obtained by calling 089-27817738 and it is available on the internet (see attachment). cordially, Ingo Lehmann - Management - Scientology Kirche Deutschland e.V. - Menschenrechtsbüro München Beichstraße 12 - 80802 München - TeI: (089)27817738 Fax: (089)27817740 EMail: kontakt@Menschenrechtsbuero.de Internet: http://www.menschenrechtsbuero.de
--- end fax transcript
[A "Scientology security statement" is a form which contractors/employers use in Germany to ask if applicants will be operating according to the doctrines of L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology Founder. The forms can be used for job or contract applicants. Use of the Hamburg form was approved by various courts including the German Federal Constitutional court ( http://cisar.org/980129a.htm) and the Hamburg government administrative court (Also contain examples of security statements excerpts: http://cisar.org/000408d.htm, http://cisar.org/000408e.htm and http://cisar.org/000408g.htm). Interior Minister Beckstein invited Scientology to sue against the Bavarian form years ago. For more perspective, see http://cisar.org/001031b.htm.]
The fact of the matter in the case referred to in the fax above: a Scientologist won a court process in the first hearing. The context of the case: A Scientologist in civil service was asked by his employer to fill out a questionnaire (the "security statement"). He sued. The court decided that he did not have to fill out the questionnaire because of "insufficient basis of [his employer's] claim." Here's the court decision:
Arbeitsgericht München 21 Ca 13754/99: Kein Urteil gegen Schutzerklärungen
It no more contains a discussion of a "security statement on Scientology" than it does a "method of alienating people from society" being found "illegitimate" by the court (quotes are from the fax above to the sect commissioners.) So the fax is not an interpretation of the court decision. Neither can what it contains be interpreted from the decision. Rather Scientology's claims are sheer fabrication.
The Scientology organization wrote in a press release (below) :
"Even 'the condition that the complainant was employed ... with the Scientology Church Bavaria Inc. ... is not evidence of anti-Constitutional activity by the complainant,' continued the court in its decision of October 24, 2000 ..."
That sounds as if the court wrote that there was no evidence of anti-Constitutional activity for the Scientology organization Actually the court did not concern itself with that question, as shown in the following sentence:
"This is because it cannot be concluded from these activities that the complainant pursues anti-Constitutional goals now or in the future, even if the Scientology Church Bavaria Inc. turned out to be an anti-Constitutional organization."
The Scientology has followed the model above exactly which was described in the section above, Judgments redefined.
The following is an unofficial translation of the following German-language Scientology page: www.Menschenrechtsbuero.de/sf3110.htm
German OSA Press Release Scientologist wins in court Bavarian Scientology Questionnaire Impermissible Munich, Germany October 31, 2000 http://www.menschenrechtsbuero.de/html/sf3110.htm Mr. K. has been employed with the City of Munich since 1990 After over 9 years of objection-free civil service, an official letter found its way to his table: Constitutional Security - according to his employer - believed it found out that Mr. K. was a member of Scientology. Therefore he was requested to fill out a questionnaire about "relations to the Scientology Organization." Mr. K. was astonished to say the least, he was supposed to thoroughly write up in detail whether and how much time he spent with "organizations, groups and establishments..., including those active in social or business areas and in the field of education which were connected in some way with the Scientology Church." The questionnaire was invented in November 1996 by Interior Minister Beckstein to discriminate against members of the Scientology Church, but had hardly a friend in the city administration. Mr. K. believed his private sphere was being violated and sued in the Munich Labor Court. The court has now decided that Mr. K., "due to a lack of assumed foundation, was not obligated" to fill out the questionnaire. It was said there was no actual evidence for Mr. K. being a member of an anti-Constitutional organization. Even "the condition that the complainant was employed ... with the Scientology Church Bavaria Inc. ... is not a evidence of anti-Constitutional activity by the complainant," continued the court in its decision of October 24, 2000 (Az.: 21 Ca 13754/99). The Human Rights Office [Menschenrechtsbuero] of the Scientology Church of Germany welcomes this brave and just decision. "It is time that the Free State [of Bavaria] wakes up and orients itself to the fact with the judgment on the theme of Scientology," according to Ingo Lehmann, Director of the Human Rights Office of the Scientology Church German in Munich. Attached: an anonymized [i.e. no names in accordance with German privacy law] decision of October 24, 2000
end of excerpt from: www.Menschenrechtsbuero.de/sf3110.htm
--- begin press release (translation)Dianetik-Scientology Stuttgart e.V. Press Release 10 July 99 French Cassation Court rejects General State Attorney's office appeal Scientology acknowledged as religion Paris A new chapter began in the history of the Scientology Church in France with a decision handed down by the French Cassation Court on June 30, 1999. The highest French court upheld a decision by the Appeals Court in Lyon - which made headlines all across Europe in July 1997 - whereby the Scientology Church was stated to have fulfilled all criteria of a religious congregation. The General Attorney's Office had taken the appeal to the highest court to get nine prior acquittals (in three judgments), and primarily the establishment of the religious nature of Scientology by the Lyon Superior State Court, overturned. The latter was a primary attachment of the complainant's representative in the appeals proceeding. The highest court dismissed the appeal of the General State Attorney's office concerning the acquittals as well as the establishment of the religious nature of Scientology and found that the conclusions of the Superior State Court about the religious nature of Scientology were well founded and let stand the contention in the appeal by the General State Attorney's office, since it had not recognized any logical or legal mistakes. With that, the acknowledgment of the religious nature of the Scientology Church by the highest court in France has been verified. Now, according to the French Constitution and the European Human Rights Convention, Scientologists may freely proselytize and practice their religion without governmental restrictions. The judgment also has significance for the criticism of the Scientology Church in Germany, because a one-time negative decision by the Lyon State Court from 1996 against Scientology continues to be distributed even today in official publications. For the content and further information: Reinhard Egy
--- end press release (translation)
On November 22, 1996 in Lyon, France, the former director of the local Scientology branch was sentenced to three years in prison plus 150,000 DM in fines. The foremost accusation consisted of blame for a Scientology adherent's suicide. A total of 25 Scientology adherents altogether were charged for various crimes. Five were exonerated.
The decision was confirmed in an appeal on July 28, 1997. The sentence was imposed provisionally. In the original hearing only half of he sentence had been made provisional. Imposition of a suspended punishment is applied in proportion to personal conditions. Therefore it was taken under consideration that the accused held the Scientology organization to be a religious community. Naturally the court addressed the arguments of the accused and - as usual - accepted some and rejected others. But the acceptance only pertains to the person of the accused, not to his organization.
A Scientology spokesman in France said of the outcome of the appeal: With the more lenient sentence the court indirectly acknowledged the organization as a religious organization. Scientology Chief Jentzsch from the USA: "Victory for religious freedom." He said a dream had come true. News agencies subsequently reported that the court had acknowledged Scientology as a religion in France. That, however, does not fall under the jurisdiction of a criminal court. Details: AGPF-Info 11/97 Scientology in France: Conviction confirmed. Scientology acknowledged?
The judgment was re-confirmed in an appeal of June 30, 1999. The court made it clear that it was not deciding whether Scientology was a religion.
The relevant paragraph:
"Attendu qu'en l'état de ces seules énonciations, exemptes d'insuffisance ou de contradiction et procédant de l'appréciation souveraine, par les juges de fond, des faits et circonstances de la cause, contradictoirement débattus, et abstraction faite d'un motif inopérant mais surabondant, dépourvu en l'espèce de toute portée juridique, relatif à la qualité de religion prètée à l'église de scientologie, la cour d'appel a justifié sa décision sans encourir les griefs allégués"
An English translation available over the internet from Roger Gonnet http://home.worldnet.fr/gonnet/cassation.htm follows:
N° A 98-80.501D N°3203 MPH 30 juin 1999 M. GOMEZ, président, R E P U B L I Q U E F R A N C A I S E AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS The Cassation Cour [more or less similar to Supreme Court], Criminal Room, through its public hearing held into the Palais de Justice de Paris , has rendered the following ruling: Ruling on the appeal formed by: -The General Prosecutor near the Lyon Court of Appeal, against the ruling of the 4th above said Court Room, on July 28th 1997, which had notably relaxed Yves VEAU, Laurent QUOISSE, Damien CALVIN, Henri CAILLAUD, Jean-Paul CHAPELLET, Danièle CHEVOLLEAU épouse GOUNORD, Alain BAROU and Marie-Annick BAUDRY épouse ROBERT, charged with fraud and fraud complicity; (page 2)====== The Court, ruling after debates in the public hearing done on May 19th, 1999, where have been present : M. Gomez, président, M. Martin, reporter adviser, MM. Schumacher, Pibouleau, Challe, Roger, room's advisers, Mme de la Lance, MM. Soulard, Samuel, public auditors; Attorney General: M. de Gouttes, Room's clerk: Mme Daudé From the report of M. the adviser MARTIN, the remarks done by the civil professional company PIWNICA & MOLINIE, attorneys in the Court, and conclusions of M. Attorney General de GOUTTES; Considering the memoranda produced by demand and by defense; Whereas it results from the attacked appeal that the leaders of the Dianetics Center and of the church of scientology of Lyon, the members of the staff of those associations and three executives of the church of scientology of Paris, have been sued before the correctionnelle [criminal room, as opposed to the "assise" court, where more serious crimes are judged] jurisdiction, notably on fraud and complicity counts; That the Appeal Judges have held into the links of the accusation Jean-Jacques Mazier, Corinne Medallin spouse Barou, and Pascale Dullin, spouse Gaidos, leaders of the Lyon associations, as authors of the frauds and some other accused under accomplices quality, noting that the firsts, with help and support from the seconds, had made of the dianetics center and the church of scientology of Lyon, enterprises of improper solicitation to the prejudice of their adepts, by using two types of fraudulent maneuvers; That the ruling first noted the publication into the local media of advertisings never mentioning that they emanated from the church of scientology, written in equivocal terms and sometimes indubitably lying ones, to make believe or let believe to the reader that some job offers were at stake, offers tied to books buying, to courses attendance and to the participation to immediately payable sessions, while in fact the real purpose was to get them adhering to scientology and not to get a job offer; That it then noticed the massive distribution of leaflets, never referencing the scientology church, proposing (page 3)===== free personality tests, analyzed on computers by people having not the least competence for such matters and revealing almost systematically heavy personal problems; that it adds that those fraudulent maneuvers were intended to persuade [the public] of the existence of faked enterprises [activities, systems etc.], i.e., the associations called centre de dianétique de Lyon and église de scientologie de Lyon, presented as institutions able to solve, through L. Ron Hubbard doctrine's application, the pretended difficulties revealed through the tests and to privilege the blossoming and success of the adept, while in fact those associations dispensed, with increasing payments asked, courses, auditing sessions, purification cures, which could end, in some cases, in a true mental manipulation, were constituting enterprises having as only purpose or for essential purpose, the improper solicitation of the adept's fortune; In this status; Regarding the first cassation's cause, proposed by the general prosecutor near the Lyon Court of Appeal, taken from the infringement of articles 405 old, 313-1 new, of the penal Code; "from the fact that the ruling has relaxed the above named accused for default of intentional element; "while it does not pertain to the judicial judge to pronounce himself on the religious character of a community such scientology church and to draw conclusions upon the good faith area; Regarding the second cassation's cause, taken from infringement of articles 405 old, 313-1 new of the penal Code, 593 of the penal procedure Code, lack of legal basis, insufficiency or motives' contradictions "regarding the fact that the ruling relaxed the above named accused because of absence of intentional item; "while the appeal court could not, through observation of inapplicable facts to a same group of persons, draw into the appreciation of their good faith, consequences diverging whose motivation had not been explicated; (page 4)====== Regarding the third cassation cause, taken from the infringement of articles 59, 60 and 405 old, 121-7 and 313-1 new of the Penal Code, lack of legal base, insufficiency or motives' contradictions; "regarding the fact that the ruling released three executives of the church of scientology of Paris of the count of frauds complicity; "while first, the appeal court, which noticed to the count of these three executives, actions of help and support, did not draw legal consequences from its conclusions; "while secondly, their bad faith results from the identification of their fraud activities between the church of scientology Paris with [activities] of the executives in Lyon scientology church; The causes being so exposed; Whereas the appeal court, primarily, after having reminded that the religious freedom was complete and under the only restrictions resulting of public security measures, public health or public morality, said that the church of scientology can vindicate the religion's title, before though, to notice that individuals could use a religious doctrine, licit in itself, to financial or commercial purposes to defraud good faith people and that the practice of a cult can lead to fraudulent maneuvers from certain members of that religion; Whereas that, to relax Alain Barou, Laurent Quoisse, Henri Caillaud, Damien Calvin and Marie-Annick Robert, members of the staff of the two Lyon associations quoted above and getting a symbolic allocation, the appeal judges mention that these accused, "who entered in scientology" through similar methods to those described by the plaintiffs, and who could, at least for some of them and in a relative measure, be taken as victims themselves, were in fact mere parts of the associations they helped to run; that it [the appeal court] adds that, restricted to precise roles, they did not know obligatorily the fraudulent processes used by Jean-Jacques Mazier, Corinne Medallin and Pascale Dullin, and that a doubt remains regarding the moral element of the fraud and complicity infringements; That, to get rid also of the charges upon Danièle Gounord, Jean-Paul Chapellet and Yves Veau, executives exerting different roles into the scientology church in Paris, the ruling said that if it certain that all three helped punctually to the two churches of Lyon by having cooperation relationships , the complete examination of the procedure does not allow to conclude that they had, through provocation [orders] or instructions, been part of execution of the fraudulent maneuvers undertaken by Jean-Jacques Mazier, Corinne Medallin and Pascale Dullin to commit the fraud which have been accounted to them, neither that they had knowingly favored the running of those enterprises keeping on acting fraudulently; Whereas under such only elements, lacking of insufficiencies or contradiction and coming from sovereign appreciation, through the judges operating on the merits, on facts and circumstances of the cause, contradictorily debated, and without taking into account an inoperating motive but superabundant [=which should not had been said, is displaced or inapplicable, not], entirely lacking of any judicial influence, related to the quality of religion attributed to the church of scientology, the appeal court has justified its decision without incurring the alleged torts; From this the causes cannot be supported; And whereas the ruling is regular in its form; DISMISSES the appeal; So done and judged by the Cassation's Court, criminal room, and pronounced as such by the president, on June thirty, nineteen hundred ninety nine; Following this the present ruling has been signed by the president, the reporter and the room's clerk; --- This is the communiqué sent from the Mission Interministérielle de Lutte contre les Sectes (MILS) , depending of the Prime Minister services, Paris. (translation is unofficial, I don't know if there is an official one) PREMIER MINISTRE MISSION INTERMINISTERIELLE DE LUTTE CONTRE LES SECTES Paris, July 1st, 1999 -Press release- Scientology could not be recognized as a religion before Courts The Interministerial Mission to Struggle against Cults acknowledges formally, satisfactorily, of the Supreme Court ruling on June 30th, 1999. First, the indubitable character of the support given by Mme Gounord and MM. Chapellet and Veau to both the scientologist Lyon "churches" has been reaffirmed. Secondly, the Supreme Court limits itself to notice that the examination of the proceedings, which excluded the above persons of any sentence for the fraud affair committed in Lyon by three scientology executives, did not allow to prove that they had "by provocation or instructions, been part of the conception or execution " of so said fraudulent maneuvers. Implicitly, the Court reminds that no particular penal immunity has existed. Third, the Supreme Court reminds that it is not up to the judge to rule over the religious character of an association. The whereas of the Lyon Court, from which scientology abusively said it "had recognized it as a religion" by a French court, is therefore nullified. ---
German Scientology News