The transition of a religious community from the Moscow Patriarchate to the OCU. What did the Supreme Court decide?
On April 23, a ruling was issued by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court regarding the right of a religious community to transition from the Moscow Patriarchate to the OCU.
Alexander Khrustiuk, who represents the Moscow Patriarchate in the Zhytomyr region, appealed the decision of the religious community that chose to transition to the Ukrainian church and changed its statutes.
In its ruling, the Grand Chamber stated that neither the court nor the state have the right to prohibit religious communities from doing so without the church’s consent, as it would interfere with freedom of religion:
“… there would be a situation in which the state would make the recognition of a religious community dependent on the will of the recognized church authority, which obviously relies on such recognition (see mutatis mutandis the decision of the ECHR in the case of “Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and others v. Moldova”, application No. 45701/99, § 123), which would indicate its failure to fulfill its obligation to be neutral and impartial in relations with various religions, confessions, and beliefs. In this conclusion, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court also takes into account that the legislator has established a rule aimed at protecting the right to freedom of religion of the part of the community that disagrees with the decision to change subordination: it has the right to form a new religious community and conclude a contract on the use of a cult building and property with its owner (user).”
Excerpt from the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in case No. 906/1330/21 (Chairman Vitaliy Urkevych, reporting judge Kostiantyn Pilkov):
The decision of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court has already been painfully reacted to by lawyer Rostyslav Kravets, whose Telegram channel, according to the research of the public initiative “Holka,” is part of the Kremlin network that discredits judicial reform.
In his post, Kravets refers to the judges of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court as “random people” and accuses them of “self-removal from resolving this fundamental dispute.”
Screenshot from Rostyslav Kravets’ Instagram
What should the intelligence services and the parliament do?
Iryna Fedoriv
Chairperson of the public initiative "Holka"
Kravets' position on the FSB in robes is not surprising. On his Telegram channel, which is part of the Kremlin network, he systematically undermines judicial reform, honest judges, and leaders of key civil society organizations advocating for judicial reform, such as the DEJURE Foundation and the Anti-Corruption Center. Individuals like Kravets should be closely monitored by the Security Service of Ukraine. As for the "FSB in robes," it is very disappointing that on April 23, the government project to prevent the activities of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine is once again not on the agenda of the parliament. Moreover, for three weeks now, the country has been unable to see the final version of the text for the second reading, which the Verkhovna Rada Secretariat has not published on its website.
Screenshot from the Government Initiative Card No. 8371 dated April 23, 2024
Recall that on April 4, the Committee on Humanitarian and Information Policy gave positive conclusions to the government bill (8371), which allows blocking the activities of organizations subordinate to the aggressor state.
Representatives of “Servant of the People,” European Solidarity, “Holos,” “Batkivshchyna,” and a number of parliamentary groups confirmed their readiness to support this bill in the session hall.
In the fall of 2023, MPs Oleksandr Alyksiychuk (“Servant of the People”) and Yulia Klymenko (“Holos”) had to initiate the collection of signatures in the session hall to have this legislative initiative considered in the first reading.
For over a year, the parliament has not considered another government bill (7476), which provides for the cleansing of local self-government bodies from deputies elected from banned parties. This is despite the fact that the Ministry of Justice has called this bill the most effective way to help cleanse local councils.
