STOP OCSE CHAIRMANSHIP BY KAZAKHSTAN

Supported by:
Federation of Hindu Temples in France
Hindu Forum of Britain
Hindu American Foundation
Hindu Forum of Belgium
Hindu Council of Holland
Hindu Council of Africa
Hindu Council of Australia
Hindu Conference of Canada
Italian Hindu Union
National Council of Hindu Temples UK
Vishwa Hindu Parishad UK

For more information, contact:
Hindu Forum of Britain
Vascroft Estate, 861, Coronation Road
Park Royal, London, NW10 7PT
Phone: 00 44 (0) 208 965 0671
Fax: 00 44 (0) 208 965 0672
Email: info@hfb.org.uk

Table of contents
Introduction

Stop harassment of Kazakh Hindus

Kazakhstan’s Misleading Response

Kazakhstan’s attempts for international recognition

Latest developments

Local greed and victimisation of Hindus

Defamation campaigns against local Hindus

Appendix 1- Legal Position

Appendix 2 – Interview by Karasai District Hakimat official on Kazakh TV

Appendix 3 – Interview of the Kazakh Deputy Foreign Minister on Indian TV

Appendix 4 – Letter from ISKCON to Kazakh Ambassador of UK

Appendix 5 – Letter from the President of CC HA Priozerye

Appendix 6 -  Fax received from Religious Committee

Appendix 7: Latest update from Karasai Hindus

Appendix 8: Extracts from Supreme Court trial proceedings

Appendix 9: Story from Forum 18

Appendix 10: Story from Rene Wadlow, NGO Representative to the  UN

Introduction
In September 2006, national Hindu organisations from the UK, USA, Australia, Canada and other countries came together to strongly call upon the Kazakhstan Government to ask their local government in Karasai district of Almaty State to stop harassment and discrimination of Hindus living there.  Despite international pressure, the local Government has now decided to demolish houses belonging to 60 Hindus without following any procedure, protocol or observance of human rights. Riot police moved into Hindu properties on 21 November 2006 to render Kazakh citizens homeless simply because they are Hindu, while people of other faiths living in the same area have no problems and continue to live without any form of discrimination.  T

The human rights abuse in Kazakhstan are appalling. The judicial system of the Republic of Kazakhstan has passed rulings which do not refect the constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and severely effect the lives of Kazakh Hindu community. These rulings allow the government to evacuate the Hindus from their home, destroy their homes, and confiscate their properties. The Kazakh government set up a Commission to enquire into these issues, but it reached no conclusion, had no representation of Hindus and collapsed without any just discussion. The Supreme Court heard cases about Kazakh Hindusin their absence without serving them notice or allowing their lawyers to argue their case.

Sources, which preferred to be unnamed, have told Forum 18 (an international human rights organization) of "persistent rumours" that Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev's brother, Bulat Nazarbayev, wants to acquire the Krishna farm. Amanbek Mukhashev of the Religious Affairs Committee told Forum 18 that if the commune continues, "the situation could turn out badly for the Krishna followers." Sources confirmed  that the brother of the Kazakhstan President could be directly involved in the demolition of Hindu homes because of the way by which the value of the land has increased substantially in the last ten years. In any case, the Kazakh Government decided to demolish Hindu houses even before a Commission it had set up reached a verdict.

We therefore call upon the countries in Europe to come together to stop Kazakhstan from succeeding in its bid to become Chair for the Organisation for Cooperation and Security in Europe (OCSE). It would be untenable and unacceptable if a country with such a dismal record of human rights leads an organisation that is meant to champion and safeguard human rights in Europe.
Main issues
The Kazakh Government has a policy that aims to practise equality on the basis of religion or faith. Whilst the policy of non-discrimination at the central level exists on paper, it is not being turned into reality at the local level. 

In Karasai, the local government has turned a blind eye to the equality and non-discrimination policies of the Kazakh Central Government and orchestrated a sustained and structured form of harassment and discrimination against Hindus as follows:
:
1.	Land has been legally purchased by the Religious Organisation Society for Krishna Consciousness. A Supreme Court decision dated June 30, 2005 states, “That the land is given to the ROSKC and the right of ownership will arise upon registration by the empowered bodies.” On the claims of the Karasai District Hakim, courts of the first and second instance ignored and factually cancelled the Supreme Court decision. The government froze all transactions on the property so that the proper registration could not take place.

As a result, 116 acres of land, along with barn and cows have been confiscated from the Hindus. This has caused a great material loss as well as damage to the integrity and reputation of the Hindus. 
 
2.	Hindus of the Society for Krishna Consciousness purchased 66 summer cottages in a cooperative of 256 cottages. When they presented applications and documents for privatisation, the government Land Committee and Karasai District Hakim stopped all privatisation of land and initiated claims on evacuation and destruction of homes, as well as confiscation of the property of the Hindus. This is clearly selective discrimination as only Hindus from ROSKC have been targeted.

3.	 They have been singled out and targeted for further harassment as follows:
a.	Those who submitted the application for privatisation were asked to sign a document declaring they were not Hindus. 
b.	SKC members made a collective application for privatisation but the Hakim did not respond for five months. When again approached he stated that a reply would be considered within a month. After that he immediately began the legal suits against the Hindus charging that the reason was due to the fact that the cottage owners have not privatised their cottages.
c.	An attempt to demolish Hindu houses on 25th April 2006 with less than 12 hours notice failed because local Hindus blocked bulldozers by locking hands.

4.	Since the international Hindu communities in the UK, India, USA and other countries have become direly concerned, the Kazakhstan Government has attempted to deflect the issue by saying that the Government had a policy of non-discrimination. Thus, according to their perspective, it is not possible to believe that there could be any form of harassment against Hindus.  
5.	The Government has deflected the issue by saying that it was purely a ‘legal and economic’ issue despite straight forward evidence of singling out of Hindu households for discrimination exists.
6.	On 24th August the Supervision Civil Panel of the Supreme Court rejected the first 2 appeals of SKC members regarding their cottages. In violation of international standards of justice, the SKC members had not been informed of the hearings or invited to participate with representation from a solicitor. Thus the Government has exercised its final legal right to order evacuation and demolition of Hindu houses.
7.	On 28th August the Kazakh Government announced the establishment of a Commission to look at the issue. At the time of announcement, this Commission had no tenure, terms of reference or membership criteria. At the time of its formation, which was 5 days before International Religious Forum, Hindu leaders around the world voiced concerns that the Commission was another attempt to deflect the issue from international attention despite the fact that the Commission may only make recommendation and has no power to overturn Supreme Court rulings made without representation by the Hindus. 
8.	The Religious Committee informed Karasai Hindus of the establishment of the commission, and, that while the Commission was enquiring into the case the Supreme Court would not hear any cases against the Hindus. On the same day Hindus received different news from the secretariat of the Supreme Court. The message was that Supreme Court had reviewed 2 of 13 cases regarding Hindu private cottages and ruled against the Hindus. The court did so without inviting the plaintiffs to the court hearings thus depriving them from their legal right to defend their position in court. The fears of worldwide Hindu groups that the Commission was an ‘eyewash’ was vindicated as it did not uphold its own promise that the Supreme Court would not hear any cases till it concluded its enquiries.
9.	On 20 February 2006, the Karasai Hindus were served notice that their houses would be demolished. No explanations were given, no notice period, and no due process was followed. Riot police have now moved into a Hindu farm to prevent the local Hindus from demonstrating or preventing the demolition.

Stop harassment of Kazakh Hindus

Hindus around the world are now deeply concerned by the human rights violations against Hindus in Kazakhstan, and request the President of Kazakhstan to intervene in this matter and take the following actions: 

1.	Immediately stop any action or order to demolish the houses belonging to the followers of the Hare Krishna section of Hinduism
2.	Facilitate legal registration of properties which are occupied and owned by the Hindus in Karasai District. Allow them to occupy their homes, and worship, with the full rights offered by the constitution of Kazakhstan.
3.	Order the General Prosecutors office to protest the Supreme Court decisions as haven taken without any legal representation of Kazakh Hindus. 
4.	Order the General Prosecutor to protest all the decisions made against Hindus in the court of second instance
5.	Order the Karasai District  Hakimat to have all cases against the Kazakh Hindus withdrawn
6.	Clarify the role of the Commission which seems to have no real empowerment or willingness to make a fair and just enquiry
7.	Stop harassment and misinformation  campaigns directed against Hindus in Kazakhstan

We also appeal to the OCSE Ministerial Council to stop Kazakhstan from becoming Chair of OCSE as it will be unacceptable and untenable to have a country with such a dismal record of human rights to hold this position.

Supported by:
Federation of Hindu Temples in France
Hindu Forum of Britain
Hindu American Foundation
Hindu Forum of Belgium
Hindu Council of Holland
Hindu Council of Africa
Hindu Council of Australia
Hindu Conference of Canada
Italian Hindu Union
National Council of Hindu Temples UK
Vishwa Hindu Parishad UK

Kazakhstan’s Misleading Response

Kazakhstan has recently ratified the United Nation’s Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This means that the Kazakh government is obliged to allow all sections of society to have or adopt a religion or belief of their choice and freedom, and to practice and observe their religion in public and private without interference.

In spite of targeted abuse by Karasai District officials and the government Land Committee, the chairman of the Department of Religious Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Justice, has tried misleading the public by saying that the events were purely economic and legal, but have nothing to do with religion. 
The official stand of the Kazakhstan Government
In another attempt to cover the Kazakh discrimination against local Hindus, the Kazakhstan Ambassador to UK, Mr. Idrissov told concerned leaders of the British Hindu organisations on 30th August 2006 that:
1.	Reports of discrimination being reported at the local level were not correct because; 
2.	“the Kazakh Government has a policy of non-discrimination and that ‘not a drop of blood had been spilled in Kazakhstan in the name of religion’
3.	An inter-agency Commission had been set up to deal with the issues of the with the issues of Kazakh Hindus.
Discrepancies in the Kazakhstan stand
UK Hindus pointed out the following discrepancies in the Kazakh government’s position:
1.	The documented instances of discrimination against local Kazakh Hindus were very real and completely verifiable. Denying them as ‘not factual’ amounts to an attempt to dismiss evidence without hearing it.
2.	Because the Kazakh Government has a policy of non-discrimination at the national level does not mean that administrators at the local level are implementing this policy. There is a continuous and sustained effort to specifically target Kazakh Hindus to prevent them from owning land or conducting religious activities. Such a policy that remains on paper, and has no effect on the lives of the people who are suffering discrimination, and, offers little protection against it. 
3.	Over the years the national government has turned the eye to reports of discrimination and harassment of Hindus in the name of a paper-policy. Thus the national government appears to be supporting such a policy.
4.	The proposed Commission to investigate the allegations of discrimination and harassment has no terms of reference, no definition of qualifications for membership, an unknown tenure and total lack of clarity in terms of authority and power. The Commission was suddenly announced after attempts by UK Hindus to contact the Kazakh Ambassador on 26th August. Even the local Kazakh Hindus had no information of such a Commission, and were only informed by fax on 31st August with no details of its powers, authority, composition, or terms of reference. Many Hindu leaders therefore felt that it looked suspiciously like an attempt to deflect the issue by ‘parking’ it in a zone where no decision would be made. These fears were proved correct when the promises made by the Commission that Supreme Court hearings would not take place until the Commission concluded its enquiry were not upheld and a hearing was still held and reached a verdict against Karasai Hindus. 
5.	When the commission took place it was a dysfunctional, only two persons from the committee appointed in the capital attended and it was orchestrated by a person who has consistently not responded to the Hindus appeals for help over the years. It was all conducted by this one man in cooperation with the Karasai government who are obviously inimical to the local Hindus.
6.	Now, the Kazakh Government has clearly violated all known human rights by sending in demolition teams to make Kazakh Hindus homeless.
It is clear that the Kazakh Government is buying time to deflect the issue.  But why?
Kazakhstan’s attempts for international recognition
The answer to the question, why the Kazakh Government wishes to buy time and deflect international attention, is that the nation makes great efforts to promote itself as a country where religious freedom is a state policy and a citizen’s right. 
Kazakhstan wishes to take the Chair of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe in 2009. The OSCE is the world’s largest regional security organisation with 56 nations in its membership. Chairmanship of this international body will greatly enhance the Kazakh international repute.

Kazakhstan’s bid for OSCE Chairmanship
 
The OSCE has stringent requirements for membership and chairmanship, the foremost being a clean record of human rights and freedom. 

One attempt to enhance their aspirations was the International Religious Forum held on September 12, 13, 2006. This objective of this conference had been to present the Kazakh Government as a country with religious freedom and harmony between faith communities.

As Kazakhstan hopes that the publicity generated by these events will help in its bid for Chairmanship of the OSCE it is keen to deflect any attention from discrimination shown to any minority religious groups.

Thus Hindu leaders feel that the Kazakh Government’s attempt to establish a Commission which has no definition had simply been a smoke-screen to deflect any untoward publicity till such time as Kazakhstan becomes Chair of the OSCE.
The new Commission – a tiger with no teeth
The Supreme Court is the topmost adjudicating body in Kazakhstan. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear two appeals establishes the precedent for all other homes of the Hindus. This means that there will be no recourse from eviction and demolition, save the investigation and legal protest of the General Prosecutor of Kazakhstan.

The formation of a Commission, after the fact of Supreme Court decisions, raises two questions:

1.	Can the Commission overturn a decision already made by the Supreme Court?  The Commission is clearly not empowered to do this as it is only an advisory body.

2.	If the Commission has no power or authority to overturn a discriminatory court decisions already made, what use is such a Commission?  

3.	The Commission followed no due process of enquiry and had no power to stop the Karasai Government from serving demolition notices on 20 November 2006 and allowing riot police to oversee demolition of Hindu houses from 21 November 2006.

Is this commissions use merely to deflect world opinion in a convenient way till such time as the discrimination against Hindus can be practised after the world opinion becomes silent?
Latest developments

Supreme Court Decision
On 31 August 2006, Members of the Society for Krishna Consciousness (SKC) and advocates flew to the capital for a meeting with the Chairman of the Civil Panel of the Supreme Court. This meeting was coordinated by the Senate of the Parliament of Kazakhstan. 
Prior to the meeting SKC members went to the reception of the Supreme Court to investigate when hearings on 2 appeals would be reviewed. 
SKC members were informed that on 24th August the Supervision Civil Panel of the Supreme Court made its final decision on the first 2 appeals of SKC members regarding their cottages. The Appeal review was rejected. 
The SKC members had not been informed of the hearings or invited to participate. The hearing was the last instance and established a Supreme Court precedent to be followed in all subsequent cases. Thus, despite signs of goodwill, negotiations, or commissions, the government now has the final legal right to order evacuation and demolition of the houses of members of SKC. There is no higher instance to which we may appeal. 
The only way it may be cancelled is if General Prosecutor or the Chairman of the Supreme Court will protest the decisions the Civil Panel of the Supreme Court has made. 
When we asked why we were not invited to the court hearing the answer was: “We didn’t want you to waste your money on the trip to Astana”. 
On 1st September, SKC solicitors received the decisions of the Supreme Court. The decisions are verbatim replica of the Almaty Provincial court. It was obvious that the Supreme Court never studied the SKC appeal as there was no comment given regarding the valid points which SKC advocates has made in the appeal. 
The Commission
Karasai Hindus spoke with an officer of the Religious Committee appointed to deal with the issue. 
When asked questions regarding the Commission it appeared that the officer had just begun to gather participants and had no idea what the commission was empowered to do.  
Religious Committee assured Karasai Hindus that the Supreme Court would postpone all hearings until the Commission reached its verdict. This promise was not upheld and the Supreme Court went ahead and conducted a hearing in which the verdict was unfavorable to Hindus.
In Delhi
A representative of ISKCON Delhi, Mahamantra Dasa, met the Kazakh Ambassador to India. The Ambassador suggested removal of ISKCON members from the list of participants of the Hindu delegation of the upcoming International Religion Congress. The Ambassador did not suggest the idea of the development of a commission, which further indicates that it had been a sudden idea to deflect international attention away from the religious discrimination in the Karasai District of Kazakhstan. 

Local greed and victimisation of Hindus
The nexus between state officials and real estate developers

Local Hindus from Karasai District have pointed out that the land owned by Hindus had appreciated from fifty thousand dollars to over two million dollars. They have been quietly informed by officers in the Kazakh Government that the land of the Hindus is too lucrative and that the entire area is _argeted for the development of elite villas which will bring developers millions of dollars in revenue.

Though the government officials state that it is a case of greed of the “rich and powerful”, all of the cases are initiated by the the Kazakh Government and ruled against by the judicial system of the government.

Thus, there has been pressure from highly positions individuals to that the Hindus evicted. Given the peaceful background of the Hindus they provided an easy target.

Forum 18’s allegations that the brother of the President of Kazakhstan could be behind the land-grabbing needs to be looked at carefully by international agencies.

Defamation campaigns against local Hindus
The Karasai District government has been working to defame the Hindu community to the national government in the following way:
1.	Deporting foreign devotees despite the fact that they had proper registration.
2.	Confiscation of the identity documents of the local Hindus. The temple had
to negotiate for months to get the return of the documents. 
3.	Never allowing Hindu ‘Krishnaites’ to privatise their land plots. The Karasai District government would order a paper be signed that “I am not a Hare Krishna Hindu” before they would consider a request for privatisation.
4.	Smear campaigns in the Kazakh media have always been focused on subjects such as “Krishnaites steal Kazakh earth” despite the fact that the local Hindus are Kazakhs, have paid all fees for houses and property, and have always paid taxes to the government of Kazakhstan.
5.	The Court issued orders for destruction of homes belonging to local Hindus without due process and notification. The court executives did not inform people properly about the planned demolition.
6.	Igor Rotar, a journalist of the international religious watch organisation Forum 18, was told on Friday April 28, 2006 by the court executive of the Karasai district, R.G. Baimukhanbetova, that if the local Hindus offered resistance to the demolition and confiscation they would “resort to violent measures.”
7.	Ryskul Zhunispaeva from the department of internal politics of Karasai district said in interview to Galina Ryzhkina (Channel 31) on April 25, 2006: “Actually, I think, the Krishnaites should be leave for India”. Her reference was to Hindus who were citizens of Kazakhstan.
8.	Andrey Grishin, the journalist of International Bureau of Human Rights observed: “Those words characterize the position of the officials of the Karasai
District officials in full.”
9.	The Almaty Province Land Committee officer, Mr. Anatoli Portnyagin, stated in a hearing in the Almaty Province Court, “The Krishna Hindu’s are a terrorist organisation and they will create a second Chechnya in Kazakhstan.” 

Chronology of events

There are two issues. 
1.	Society of Krishna Consciousness (SKC) Land (117.9 acres) 
2.  	66 private summer cottages.

SKC Land
20/03/1999	Established the Hindu Hare Krishna Community in the Republic of Kazakhstan (RK). This Land was purchased by 3 SKC members from a private farmer. During this transaction the notary changed the usage of land  from “peasant farming” to “Part-time farming” (without the knowledge of the SKC community)
	
17/05/2002	Legal registration of Provincial Hare Krishna Community in the Republic of Kazakhstan on the land plots at issue	
2003	RK passed legislation allowing privatisation of land away from public land ownership. SKC land was privatised.
	
29/03/2004	Hakim issued sale-purchase contract between Hakim and SKC members granting them right of private ownership	
06/04/2004	To enable the registration of the land for religious purposes, the Land was sold by the three SKC members to an agent of SKC. 
	
18/04/2004	 The SKC agent sold 3 lots to Consortium of: Kazakh Society for Krishna Consciousness and Hungarian Society for Krishna Consciousness	
30/06/2005	A case was registered. Eventually the Supreme Court gave a right of use and transfer to SKC subject to the registration of the right at a local level	
15/05/2005	Before the land was registered according to the Supreme Court decision the Hakim brought a claim to consider all the transactions on land null and void and transfer the land of  SKC to Karasai District land reserve without compensation..	
29/03/2006	Confiscation order was illegally given by lower courts even though they did not have the power to reverse the Supreme Courts decision	

Summer Cottages
1999	In 1999 when a big property was purchased, SKC members began purchasing 66 summer cottages in a cooperative society around the SKC Land that had a total of 256 cottages.
	
2004	After the privatisation law was passed, some cottages applied for privatisation. Those who submitted the application were asked to sign a document declaring that they were not SKC members. 	
24/11/2004 and 21/02/2005	SKC members made collective applications for privatisation.  The Hakim did not respond for five month even though RK law obliged him to respond in one month.
	
23/04/2005	After the five months, the Hakim extended the deadline for one more month. Before the expiry of this period, he filed various suits against the cottage owners for not having privatised their cottages. There is no time limitation for privatisation for properties. 
	
April 2006	Demolition and confiscation orders were issued against owners of summer cottages with less than 24 hours notice. No compensation was offered to SKC members and the land was ordered to be taken back by the state and auctioned. The SKC members have no other place of residence and would be rendered homeless The SKC members protested by locking hands in prayer as the bulldozers arrived.	
August 2006	 An inter-agency Commission is set up to deal with the situation. International Hindu communities felt that this Commission which had no tenure, terms of reference, membership criteria or even the authority to reverse the Supreme Court decision was an attempt to deflect international attention from Kazakhstan while the International Religious Congress was taking place and the Kazakh Government maintains its bid for chairmanship of the OSCE.	
August 2006	 The Chairman of the Commission promises that no Supreme Court hearings will be held until the Commission finished its enquiry.	
August 2006	Supreme Court rejects the appeal of two applicants challenging eviction orders by lower court. The hearing is heard without any dates for the hearing or invitations to participate being issued to the local Hindus who had no idea that a hearing had been scheduled. The entire hearing was conducted without the presence of legal representation by Hindus. 

Thus, despite the promise of the Religious Committee and the Senate, the Supreme Court forged ahead and passed a verdict against Hindus, thus proving that the Commission had no real teeth. 	
07/09/ 2006	The commission was established in the capital by Religious Committee of Ministry of Justice to deal with the “land issues” of Hindus in Kazakhstan.  Muslim and Russian Orthodox Church were invited by government to be members of the Commission despite of the objections of Human rights workers and Hindus. Hindus were refused to have lawyers on the Commission and after long and heated discussion the lawyers were let to participate. 	
01/10/2006	The Commission arrived to the Hindu Community. Among appointed members only the Chairman and General Prosecutor’s officer were present. Local Hakimat brought 4 Kazakh television channels and bussed in unrelated villagers to scream in front of the cameras. The area of the entire farm was surrounded by a police division.	
02/10/2006	A concluding meeting of the commission took place in Karasai District Hakimat. The final statement of the commission was read: “there has been an investigation and there is no sign of religious discrimination”. 

The chairman never conducted a working session with the Hindus to discuss the issues.

Members of the commission appointed in Astana were not present at the sessions in Karasai District.

Consequently the final decision was made without members of the commission developing and working on it. 

The Commission didn’t take into consideration the opinion of the Human Rights observers, who considered the case to be a case of religious discrimination. 

Observing the work of the Commission from the time it was established the Human Rights observers considered the Commission itself to be an obvious demonstration of the religious discrimination. 	
19/11/2006	Demolition orders were served on the houses and 60 riot police moved in to prevent any demonstrations by Hindus to prevent it. Hindus have nowhere to go.	

Appendix 1- Legal Position 
1.	In both confiscation cases, of the large society owned property and of the individual properties of members of SKC, the cases should not have been reviewed by the legal system of Kazakhstan because the Karasai Rayon Hakim is an improper plaintiff. In the case of large society owned property, Hakim was not a part of transactions and his interest is not affected, in the case of  the individual properties of members, the land of the Summer Colony is not governmental, therefore Hakim’s interests again are not affected.  
2.	 In the case of the individual properties of members of SKC, the Consumer’s  Cooperative “Horticultural Society Ptitsevod” is an improper defendant as it is a newly registered CC and doesn’t represent interests of members of Horticultural Society “Ptitsevod”, which was originally established on 1988 and has as a legal successor Consumers Cooperative “Horticultural Society Priozyerye”.  The courts of all instances including the Supreme Court remain blind to an obvious legal difference between two different legal entities of which one is a successor and another is not, because if the court would let the legal successor namely CC “HS Priozyerye” to protect the interests of it’s legal members in court hearings the plaintiff namely Hakim will naturally loose all the cases. The corruption shown in courts of all instances paralyzes efforts of Hindus in courts, because court doesn’t play according to even obvious rules of Law. It makes us think that courts are executing the order of the Government of Kazakhstan and because even Supreme Court stays blind to elementary codes of Kazakh law we can only guess that the order to demolish the only Hindu Community in Kazakhstan comes from the top Government.     
3.	 In the case of the cottages the Hindu; residents have lawfully acquired their plots of land in the same fashion as all other members according to accepted procedure at the given time. There was no Privatization Law until 2003, therefore to buy the summer cottages people didn’t need to have a land act of private ownership. They were joining the Summer Cottages Societies, paying initial fee, which was a price for the land plot and house, paying annual land taxes, electricity and water supply fees and all membership chargers. Since 2003 there has been government legislation that allows privatisation of land in Kazakhstan but the authorities have never allowed the Krishna devotees to privatise their individual properties. They would ask all summer cottage society members to sign a paper that they are not Krishna Hindus then privatisation would be considered.
4.	The Hindu' houses are located on the territory of a Consumers Cooperative. There are 120 members of this Cooperative. However the claims are brought only against the members of the religious society. In each and every claim the connection of the defendants to the Religious Organization Society for Krishna Consciousness has been illustrated. In our opinion this is selective discrimination against minority religion members and a direct and flagrant violation of human rights and freedoms which are guaranteed by the Constitution of Kazakhstan. 
5.	There were no Administrative cases or legal administrative prescriptions given to Hindus, prior to bringing civil cases against them. Thus if there were infractions, people didn’t have chance to correct them within time framework mentioned in the Law of Kazakhstan.
6.	Confiscation of property without compensation is possible only in a criminal case. The case against the Hindus is a civil case. 
7.	The claims are about “eviction” from the summer cottages, but there is no such a term as “eviction” in Kazakhstan Legislation, no such an article of law, which would allow anyone to be “evicted”. Thus the Government creates illegal cases and the court supports these cases as well as prosecutors, who suppose to look after courts and governmental bodies.  It is an exclusive circle Hindus are pushed in.  
8.	On the 47.7 hectare land case the period of limitations has expired twice.
According to the laws of Kazakhstan there should be no case.
9.	The Kazakh government states that the Krishna devotees have illegally
occupied land. The government uses the terminology "conquered the land," as in illegally squatting. But the major 47.7 hectare land has been properly purchased and privatised according to Kazakh law. 
10.	The district Hakim, who personally gave permission for the privatisation, is now attempting to have the land returned to the "land reserve" of his area of governance that he may again sell and profit by millions of dollars.
11.	There is a decision of the Supreme Court that the Religious Organisation Society for Krishna Consciousness is the legal user of the land plots at issue and will be granted private ownership after registration of the property on its name by the appropriate government bodies.
12.	The lower courts have illegally ignored the decision of the Supreme Court. The Religious Society for Krishna Consciousness is a bonafide purchaser of the property and it's carries no responsibilities for mistakes of any previous owners.
13.	The legal position is that a minimum of 5 days notice must be given before confiscation of properties, but the Karasai Hindus were given less than 24 hours notice. 
14.	Confiscation of the land of the Religious Organization Society for Krishna Consciousness was ordered without any compensation being offered, in violation of Kazakh law. 
15.	Another violation of the legal code is that the Regional Hakim wishes to bring all the conclusions of cases to the original position, which would mean that the land will return to the person from whom it was first purchased.  However, the Hakim wants the ownership of the land to revert to the state and has pushed the court to give it to the land reserve of the area he is in charge of. 
16.	Confiscation of land will result in the Religious Organization Society for Krishna Consciousness to be deprived of its legal address and it will cease to exist in Karasai Rayon. 

Appendix 2 – Interview by Karasai District Hakimat official on Kazakh TV

The following is a translation of an interview to Kazakhstan TV “31 Channel” by 
Ms. Ryskul Zhunispaeva, Chief expert of the Karasai District Hakimat’s Department of Internal Politics (she supervises religious matters).

(Translated verbatim)

I think that the religious assembly of these people that we face today is illegal. These people took advantage of the economically unstable situation in the country to unlawfully occupy vacant plots of land in the horticultural association Ptitsevod.

As far as religions are concerned, they can exist freely in our country. There are four world religions: it is our Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, and Buddhism. And they also consider themselves a religion, the society of Krishnaites, but as Krishnaites they are not accepted even in India. We have facts (that confirm that). Therefore their activities on our Kazakhstani land are illegal. 

There is a Law of religious freedom in Kazakhstan. Besides, the number of different sects is growing in Kazakhstan. Our citizens of Kazakh nationality get there – those who are not satisfied with something in their lives. When we ask them, “Why did you go there? Kazakhs never betray their nation and religion,” they would not admit that they are Kazakh, from the Kazakhstani land.

These sects lead the Kazakhs away from Islam. I think that this is very dangerous for our descendants, for strengthening our Kazakh traditions and culture.

 Appendix 3 – Interview of the Kazakh Deputy Foreign Minister on Indian TV
On Friday April 28, 2006, the Kazakh Deputy Foreign Minister was interviewed on "India TV Breaking News" regarding the attempted demolition of the properties of devotees of Krishna in Kazakhstan. 
The following is the text of his statement on Indian TV:
The representatives of the major world and traditional religions have freely operated on the territory of Kazakhstan and we initiated the congress for religions of world and traditional religions will be held in September this year in Astana in our new capital. 
So on behalf of the Kazak’s side I can assure you that the rights of any conventional or ethnic groups living in harmony at peace in Kazak will be protected and I cannot tell now the details about this incident but will do all of our best in order to investigate it and reach agreement for this community as well as with any other communities established in Kazakhstan. 

Appendix 4 – Letter from ISKCON to Kazakh Ambassador of UK

June 2, 2006

Dear Ambassador Idrissov,

I would like to thank you for sending me the copy of the letter which you have sent to Baroness Flather and Mr. Tony McNulty MP, Home Office Minsiter for Security in the United Kingdom.

I would also like to express my appreciation that you have consulted the appropriate bodies in Kazakhstan regarding the issue at hand with the Society for Krishna Consciousness in Kazakhstan.

The matter of the gardening society is a delicate issue which does bring up the point of religious intolerance being shown by the local government officials.

There are over 250 plots in this particular area and 66 of these plots have been acquired by the members of the SKC. They legally acquired plots which had buildings already existing upon them. They made improvements to the buildings, cleaned their garden areas, and in general brought beauty and order to the area.

Their situation is the same as the other plot owners in the area. But, only the members of the SKC have been singled out for destruction of properties and confiscation of land.

We agree whole heartedly that in all nations there are codes and regulations of construction and corrective measures offered if there are discrepancies in the following of standard procedure. 

But in the case of the SKC members there has been no warning from the architecture department or any other administrative body. There has been no administrative cases filed and no corrective measures offered. Rather, contrary to the laws and procedures of Kazakhstan, with less than 12 hours warning, bulldozers arrived and destruction and confiscation has been offered as the solution to the issue.

Furthermore, as many times as our members have applied to the government for acts of privatisation of their land plots, they have been refused.

The other day I was speaking to the chairman of the horticultural area and asked him if he felt that the activity of the SKC infringed upon the rights of other agricultural land users in the area. His reply was quite to the contrary. He stated that since the members of the SKC have been in the area they have brought beauty, cleanliness, and order to the area.

We may also add that since the SKC's presence in the area there have been consistent negative television reports given by officers of the government.

Recently Ms. Ryskul Zhunipaeyeva stated on Kazakh Television that the Krishna religion is not accepted even in India and that such sects take true Kazakhs away from Islam. This last week Mr. Anatoli Portnyagin, an officer of the Almaty Oblast land committee, stated that the Krishna followers are "wolves in sheep’s clothing."

Such statements from government officials, plus actions which do no comply with the laws of Kazakhstan bring forth the question of religious intolerance and the failure of the rule of the law.

The SKC members have created something truly beautiful in the area of Karasai Rayon. They use their lands for agriculture, teach people how to better their live by yogic practices, and conduct their humanitarian food program. It deeply pains them, and Hindus throughout the world, that such a large amount of pressure is being applied to such a small minority religious group by the authorities of your country. 

The members of the SKC are committed to dialogue. They are ready to sit, discuss, and find solid solutions to the issues. But they really feel that destruction of the faithful's homes is not the proper way to resolve the issue. 

We again thank you for looking into the issue. We humbly request that you will communicate to the officials in Kazakhstan that there is another side of the issue.

With best regards,

BB Govinda Swami
Director, International Society for Krishna Consciousness

Appendix 5 – Letter from the President of CC HA Priozerye

The following is the text of the letter from the President of CC HA Priozerye Karasai district, Almaty region, A.V. Kolesnikov

APPLICATION

As the President of CC HA Priozerye I can allege that the members of RO Society for Krishna Consciousness who have summer plots and live on the territory of CC are law-abiding citizens, they lead peaceful life, cultivate land, do not disturb other cottagers. 

We have good neighbourship with the Krishnaites. The cottagers of CC HA Priozerye have never made any claims against the Krishnaites. The Krishnaites do not force their religious convictions upon other people. Since they took up residence in our summer colony we have order, there is less thievery. 

They have beautified the area and keep it clean. In our opinion, these religious people are cultured and peace-loving. I am convinced that the Krishnaites are respectable people, and I like their presence in our summer colony.

President of CC HA Priozerye,
Anatoly Kolesnikov
June 2, 2006

Appendix 6 -  Fax received from Religious Committee

After reviewing your application regarding the situation of Religious Organization Society for Krishna Consciousness” in Karasai District of Almaty Province the Religious Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan informs you of the following:
With the purpose of studying and producing recommendation to solve the issue there is a plan to establish a special commission from among of interested governmental bodies and organizations.
In this regard, please nominate the candidature of your representative to be included in the commission (name, surname, fathers name, position, contact telephone number).

Chairman,
E.Tugzhanov 
August 28, 2006

Appendix 7: Latest update from Karasai Hindus

In the middle of the summer we had a meeting with the director of the Senate of the Parliament, who told us that we should get positive decisions in the Supreme Court on all the claims against us, therefore we should meet the Chairman of the Supreme Court and explain the issue. 

In about 2 months on 31st of August we went to the capital to meet the Chairman of the Civil Panel of the Supreme Court. This meeting was coordinated by the Senate of the Parliament.  Before the meeting in the Supreme Court we went to the reception office of the Supreme Court to investigate, when hearings on 2 appeals we sent to the Supreme Court would be conducted. 

We were informed that on 24th of August the Supervision Panel of the Supreme Court conducted 2 hearings without informing us of the date and time of the hearings and consequently not giving us an opportunity to protect our rights. The court decisions were not in our favour. You can find them in the attached file to this letter. When we asked why we were not invited to the court hearings the answer was: “We didn’t want you to waste your money on the trip to Astana”.  

On the 1st of September we actually got these 2 decisions of the Supreme Court. Reading them we could see that the Supervision Panel of Supreme Court had not even opened or read our appeal. The decisions were word by word copies of the decision of the Provincial Court. 

On 7th of September, in one week before International Religious Forum, the Government Commission on our issue was established in the capital. The decision was to study the case from the perspective of both plaintiffs and defendants and in the end of the month to actually visit the farm and take final decision there. 

Rati Manjari dd
02 October 2006

Appendix 8: Extracts from Supreme Court trial proceedings

25 August, 2006

Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Almaty
N.A. Epova
N.A. Kirilchenko

Please find attached a copy of the resolution issued as a result of preliminary examination of the supervisory plea, with the decision to deny supervisory proceedings.

This resolution is final, not to be appealed against, as prescribed by the law. Recurring supervisory pleas from the same persons will not be considered.

The resolution of the Supreme Court about the results of preliminary examination of the supervisory plea may not be an impediment to applying with supervisory pleas to public prosecution bodies within one year term.

Appendices: 38 pages of the documents attached to the supervisory plea, a copy of the resolution (3 pages).

Chairman of the court				S. Raimbayev

RESOLUTION No.4g-2628-06

24th August, 2006  				
Astana

The judges of the RK Supreme Court’s supervisory college G.B. Ak-kuova, B.A. Zhakupov, R.N. Nurtai performed preliminary examination of the supervisory plea of N.A. Epova and N.A. Kirilchenko, the representatives of the defendant A.V. Markin, against the decision of the Karasai district court of May 27, 2005, and the resolution of the College of Civil Cases of the Almay Provincial Court dated July 27, 2005, about the civil case opened after the plaint of the Provincial Territorial Department of Land Resources Management and the Hakim of the Karasai district, Almaty province, against A.V. Markin and the consumers’ cooperative “Horticultural Association ‘Ptitsevod’” about eviction from the plot of land, demolition of the illegally constructed building and declaring the record in the horticultural book null and void.

IT WAS FOUND THAT

The plaintiffs applied to the court with the plaint against A.V. Markin and the Consumers’ Cooperative “Horticultural Association ‘Ptitsevod’” (abbr. HA) about eviction from the plot of land, demolition of illegally constructed building and declaration of the record in the horticultural book null and void. They stated that A.V. Markin had unlawfully occupied the plots No.176 and No.178 which were previously used by the other members of HA and, without permission of the architectural department, constructed two hostels. The defendant used these buildings as a monastery for the members of the Religious Organization “Society for Krishna Consciousness.” The members of this organization live there, conduct their meetings, forums and religious rites. Besides, in 1999 A.V. Markin illegally occupied the plot No.160.

By the decision of the Karasai district court of May 27, 2005, the plaint was sustained. It was decided to evict A.V. Markin from the plots No.No.176, 178, 160 located on the territory of HA. The court obliged A.V. Markin to demolish at his own cost the two-storied buildings located on the plots No. No. 176, 178, 160, along with the annexes. The record in the horticultural book of P.P. Pasyugin, namely “re-register in favor of A.V. Markin,” was declared null and void, as well as the horticultural book given to A.V. Markin as the user of the plots No. No. 176, 178, 160 on December 12, 1999.

By the decision of the College of Civil Cases of the Almaty Provincial Court dated July 27, 2005, the decision of the court of first instance was left unchanged.

N.A. Epova and N.A. Kirilchenko (on behalf of the defendant A.V. Markin) in their supervisory plea requested to cancel the judicial acts related to this case and issue a new decision to dismiss the plaint because the conclusions of the court did not correspond to the facts and the defendant was improper.
 
Having examined the arguments of the supervisory plea, we believe that supervisory proceedings should not be instigated for the following reasons.

According to section 387 of CPC reconsideration of the judicial acts that have come into effect is only possible if the court essentially violated the norms of the material or the procedural law, however such violations did not take place.

As can be seen from the materials of the supervisory plea, the Horticultural Association “Ptitsevod” received a state act of permanent land use for the land with total area 12.2 ha according to the decision of the Karasai district administration, Almaty province, No.4-1033 dated April 26, 1993. 

According to the standard statute of horticultural association adopted by the decision No.355 of the Council of Ministers of Kaz.SSR and Kazsofprof on September 11, 1986, members of horticultural associations were allotted plots by the joint decision of the administration and the trade union. The members were allowed to build standard summer cottages and later put them into operation in the established order.

The court found that the local executive authority has never issued decisions about transferring the plots No. No. 176 and 178 to the former members of HA P.P. Pasyugin and A.T. Markin, and a state act for the plot at issue has never been issued as prescribed by the Law of Kaz.SSR “On Land Reform” dated June 28, 1991, and the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan “About Land” dated December 22, 1995. No state act for the plots No. No. 176, 178, 160 was given to the defendant A.V. Markin

These facts show that the transfer of land to A.V. Markin was illegal and no titles were established. Thus the court decision in this regard is well-grounded.

Considering the above stated facts, the court legitimately declared that A.V. Markin had constructed the buildings without proper permissions as stipulated by the Law of RK “About architecture and urban development” dated June 16, 2001, thus the buildings are illegal and subject to demolition by the constructor or at his cost, as per sec.244, part 2, of CC.

The court also authentically found that the plots No. No. 176, 178 and 160 are used by A.V. Markin contrary to their purpose, namely for performing religious rites of the Society for Krishna Consciousness which obstruct the other members of HA in their usage of the summer plots and interrupt their normal life.

According to p.1.5.3. of the Statute of the Consumers’ Cooperative “Horticultural Association ‘Ptitsevod,’” operation and propaganda of different political parties, unions and religious organizations is prohibited on the territory of HA.

It is stated in the plea that A.V. Markin acquired the plots and constructed the buildings on legal grounds, however these arguments deserve no attention and are naked and unsubstantiated.

Since the Consumers’ Cooperative “Horticultural Association ‘Ptitsevod’” is the legal successor of the Horticultural Association “Ptitsevod,” the arguments of the plea in regard to the improper defendant are inconsistent.

Under these circumstances, the existing judicial acts remain lawful and well-grounded, there are no reasons why they should be reversed and the supervisory plea allowed.

Considering the above mentioned facts and going by the section 394 of CPC,

IT WAS RESOLVED

to deny the request to instigate supervisory proceedings and revise the decision of the Karasai district court dated May 27, 2005, and the resolution of the College of Civil Cases of the Almaty Provincial Court dated July 27, 2005.

A copy of this resolution is sent to the representatives of A.V. Markin  - N.A. Epova and N.A. Kirilchenko.

Judges 
G.B. Ak-kuova
B.A. Zhakupov
R.N. Nurtai

SECOND DECISION AGAINST A MEMBER OF SKC

25 August, 2006

Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Almaty
N.A. Epova
N.A. Kirilchenko

Please find attached a copy of the resolution issued as a result of preliminary examination of the supervisory plea, with the decision to deny supervisory proceedings.

This resolution is final, not to be appealed against, as prescribed by the law. Recurring supervisory pleas from the same persons will not be considered.

The resolution of the Supreme Court about the results of preliminary examination of the supervisory plea may not be an impediment to applying with supervisory pleas to public prosecution bodies within one year term.

Appendices: 43 pages of the documents attached to the supervisory plea, a copy of the resolution (2 pages).

Chairman of the court				S. Raimbayev

RESOLUTION No.4g-2627-06

24th August, 2006  				
Astana

The judges of the RK Supreme Court’s supervisory college G.B. Ak-kuova, B.A. Zhakupov, R.N. Nurtai performed preliminary examination of the supervisory plea of N.A. Epova and N.A. Kirilchenko, the representatives of the defendant A.N. Minin, against the decision of the Karasai district court of May 27, 2005, and the resolution of the College of Civil Cases of the Almay Provincial Court dated July 27, 2005, about the civil case opened after the plaint of the Provincial Territorial Department of Land Resources Management and the Hakim of the Karasai district, Almaty province against A.N. Minin and the consumers’ cooperative “Horticultural Association ‘Ptitsevod’” about eviction from the plot of land, demolition of the illegally constructed building and declaring the record in the horticultural book null and void.

IT WAS FOUND THAT

The plaintiffs applied to the court with the plaint against A.N. Minin and the Consumers’ Cooperative “Horticultural Association ‘Ptitsevod’” (abbr. HA) about eviction from the plot of land, demolition of illegally constructed building and declaration of the record in the horticultural book null and void. They stated that A.N. Minin had unlawfully occupied the plot No.134 that was previously used by the member of HA L.M. Fazylova and, without permission of the architectural department, constructed two-storied building which is used contrary to its purpose as a hostel for the members of the Religious Organization “Society for Krishna Consciousness.”

By the decision of the Karasai district court of May 27, 2005, the plaint was sustained. It was decided to evict A.N. Minin from the plot No.234 located on the territory of HA. The court obliged A.N. Minin to demolish at his own cost the two-storied building located on the plot No.134, along with the annexes. The record in the horticultural book of L.M. Fazylova, namely “re-register in favor of A.N. Minin,” was declared null and void, as well as the horticultural book given to A.N. Minin as the user of the plot No.134.

By the decision of the College of Civil Cases of the Akmola Provincial Court dated July 27, 2005, the decision of the court of first instance was left unchanged.

N.A. Epova and N.A. Kirilchenko (on behalf of the defendant A.N. Minin) in their supervisory plea requested to reconsider the judicial acts related to this case because the conclusions of the court did not correspond to the facts, and the norms of the material law had been applied incorrectly, resulting in the ungrounded decision.

Having examined the arguments of the supervisory plea, we believe that supervisory proceedings should not be instigated for the following reasons.

According to section 387 of CPC reconsideration of the judicial acts that have come into effect is only possible if the court essentially violated the norms of the material of the procedural law, however such violations did not take place.

As can be seen from the materials of the supervisory plea, the Horticultural Association “Ptitsevod” received a state act of permanent land use for the land with total area 12.2 ha according to the decision of the Karasai district administration, Almaty province.

The court authentically found that the local executive authority has never issued decisions about transferring the plot No.134 to either the former member of HA L.M. Fazylova, or A.N. Minin, and a state act for the plot at issue has never been issued. Therefore, the conclusion of the court about the illegal nature of the transfer of land to A.N. Minin is correct.

According to p.11, section 43 of the Land Code of RK dated June 20, 2003, transactions with land without title deeds are not allowed.

In this connection the court legitimately declared the buildings constructed by A.N. Minin to be illegal and subject to demolition according to section 244, part 2, of CC.

As A.N. Minin used the plot of land which he acquired contrary to its purpose, namely for performing religious rites of the Society for Krishna Consciousness, the court rightfully sustained the plaint.

Considering that the court did not commit serious violations of the norms of the material and the procedural law, considering that the arguments stated in the supervisory plea are connected with juridical evaluation of the case materials, and going by the section 394 of CPC,

IT WAS RESOLVED

to deny the request to instigate supervisory proceedings and revise the decision of the Karasai district court dated May 27, 2005, and the resolution of the College of Civil Cases of the Almaty Provincial Court dated July 27, 2005.

A copy of this resolution is sent to the representatives of A.N. Minin  - N.A. Epova and N.A. Kirilchenko.

Judges 
G.B. Ak-kuova
B.A. Zhakupov
R.N. Nurtai

Appendix 9: Story from Forum 18

KAZAKHSTAN: "The situation could turn out badly for the Krishna followers"
By Igor Rotar, Forum 18 News Service <http://www.forum18.org>
Hare Krishna devotees are increasingly sceptical that a state Commission, with the proclaimed aim of resolving a long-running dispute caused by the state's attempts to take over a Hare Krishna commune, will solve the issue, Forum 18 News Service has learnt. Ludmila Danilenko, of the state Religious Affairs Committee, told Forum 18 that "the decision that the Commission has reached will be made public shortly." Some suggest that the Commission's real aim was to deflect criticism at the contrast between the state's attacks on religious freedom and its often repeated boasts that it supports religious tolerance. Sources, which preferred to be unnamed, have told Forum 18 of "persistent rumours" that Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev's brother, Bulat Nazarbayev, wants to acquire the Krishna farm. Amanbek Mukhashev of the Religious Affairs Committee told Forum 18 that if the commune continues, "the situation could turn out badly for the Krishna followers."
 
Members of the Hare Krishna community are becoming increasingly sceptical that a state Commission will help them save their property from confiscation. The Commission was established in early September, with the proclaimed aim of resolving a long-standing dispute caused by state attempts to take over the commune, near the south-eastern city of Almaty. "It is more than two months since the state Religious Affairs Committee set up the special commission to settle the conflict between the Krishna devotees and the legal authorities," Hare Krishna spokesperson Maxim Varfolomeyev told Forum 18 News Service from Almaty on 15 November. "We have not received a written decision from the Commission. We are very worried at the Commission dragging out the decision." Officials have been unable to tell Forum 18 when the Commission's conclusions will be published.

At the time of the Commission's first meeting, on 8 September, some Kazakh sources suggested that its real aim was to be merely be a "show" to fend off any possible criticism at the government's "Second Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions." This was designed to bolster the government's often repeated boasts that it supports religious tolerance. Religious minorities who experience the state's policies are sceptical of these boasts (see F18News 8 September 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=839).

The 47.7 hectare (118 acre) farm is the only Hare Krishna commune in the former Soviet Union, and local officials have long tried to close it down (see F18News 19 April 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=764). In April 2006, the authorities made an attempt to bulldoze the commune, but backed off because of the presence of many journalists. However, the authorities vowed to return when the "fuss" had died down (see F18News 26 April 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=769). Some local television stations work with the authorities to encourage intolerance against religious minorities, such as Baptists and Hare Krishna devotees (see F18News 2 June 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=793).

Forum 18 was unable to reach the chairman of the Commission to resolve the conflict with the Krishna devotees Amanbek Mukhashev, who is the deputy chairman of the Justice Ministry's Religious Affairs Committee, as he was on holiday on 15 November. "The Commission to resolve the conflict with the Krishna devotees has done a great deal of work. The decision that the Commission has reached will be made public shortly," Ludmila Danilenko, deputy chair of the Religious Affairs Committee, told Forum 18 from the capital Astana on 15 November. However, Danilenko was unable to name a specific date when the conclusions of the Commission would be published.

Hare Krishna spokesperson Varfolomeyev is concerned at the way the Commission went about its work. "The Commission members visited us at the commune and looked into the conflict on the spot. It is significant that when they spoke to us the Commission members said that it was a purely economic dispute and that religion was not the underlying cause."

Varfolomeyev insists that the conflict does have a clear religious undercurrent. "The people who have dachas who are not Krishna devotees have also not managed to privatise their dachas but nobody is trying to confiscate the dachas from them," he told Forum 18. "It is also significant that when they come to the district authorities to privatise their dachas the first question they are asked is whether they are members of the Krishna commune."

Convincing evidence that the authorities are trying to repress the Krishna devotees' commune, according to Varfolomeyev, is that on the day the Commission was there (1 October) the authorities brought about 20 people by bus from surrounding villages. These people were claimed by the authorities to be dissatisfied with the existence of the Krishna commune. "We had never seen these people before around our farm," he told Forum 18. "According to our information these 'demonstrators' were brought by buses hired by the administration of Keskelen district. The authorities also invited four television channels in order to give the 'protest meeting' credibility."

The chairman of the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, Yevgeni Zhovtis, has a similar view of events. He confirmed to Forum 18 that the Keskelen district authorities brought so-called "demonstrators" by bus to hold a protest meeting. "It is obvious that the conflict has a religious origin," he told Forum 18 from Almaty on 15 November. "When the Krishna devotees appeared in Keskelen district the district authorities were very concerned. I do not deny that the conflict also has a purely economic subtext, but it seems to me that if the land did not belong to the Krishna devotees the problem would probably never have arisen."

Sources that prefer to remain anonymous suggested to Forum 18 that the Krishna devotees' problems could be explained by the fact that Bulat Nazarbayev, the president's brother, wants to buy their land. They point out that the village of Chemulgan, where President Nursultan Nazarbayev was born, is in Keskelen district. "Persistent rumours are going round the district that the president's brother Bulat Nazarbayev wants to get hold of the Krishna farm," one source told Forum 18. "However, it is practically impossible to prove it. Even if Bulat Nazarbayev were to privatise the Krishna farm he would do it through other people."

Mukhashev of the Religious Affairs Committee told Forum 18 on 23 October that the Commission had concluded the conflict surrounding the Hare Krishna farming commune was "a purely economic dispute and that religion was not the underlying cause." However, Mukhashev contradicted himself by adding that "if the Krishna followers carry out agricultural activity as formulated in the land purchase agreement with the local authorities, they will not have any problems. If they go on putting the land to a use that was not intended [by turning the farm into a commune], then the situation could turn out badly for the Krishna followers."

It is the Kazakh authorities' usual practice to attack some religious believers and communities just because of their religious beliefs. In February 2005, Kazakhstan's President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, signed "extremism" legal amendments, which restricted religious freedom. In July 2005, President Nazarbayev signed "national security" legal amendments, which placed further substantial limitations on religious freedom. Under the "national security" amendments, unregistered religious organisations are banned in Kazakhstan and missionaries have to register with the local authorities (see the F18News Kazakhstan religious freedom survey at http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=701).

Baptists and other Protestant Christians are so far bearing the main brunt of fines for unregistered religious activity (see eg. F18News 2 October 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=848). Similarly, members of the Tabligh Jama'at international Islamic missionary organisation face increased fines across Kazakhstan for trying to give lectures in mosques without state registration (see F18News 14 November 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=868).

This week, South Korean Pastor Kim U Sob, who had been resident in the country and leading a Presbyterian church for 8 years, was expelled on 14 November for "missionary activity without registration." Ironically, the expulsion took place shortly after Pastor Kim was an invited official speaker at a state "Day of Spiritual Unity and Conciliation" ceremony, marking the official claim that "religious people and communities" have "full rights" (see F18News 15 November 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=871). Some fear that additions being planned by the KNB secret police to the Religion Law will go further and will ban sharing beliefs, as well as all missionary activity (see F18News 24 October 2006 http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=859). (END)

For a personal commentary on how attacking religious freedom damages national security in Kazakhstan, see eg. F18News http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=564

For more background, see Forum 18's Kazakhstan religious freedom survey at http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=701

A survey of the religious freedom decline in the eastern part of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) area is at http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=806 and a survey of religious intolerance in Central Asia is at http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=815.

A printer-friendly map of Kazakhstan is available at http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/atlas/index.html?Parent=asia&Rootmap=kazakh
Appendix 10: Story from Rene Wadlow, NGO Representative to the  United Nations

We Worship the  Hawk

By Rene  Wadlow

Borat, the journalist of the film “Borat: Cultural Learnings of America  for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan” has been presenting a satirical image of Kazakh culture to millions of film fans who have only a vague idea of Central Asian society.  Thus  speaking of religion in Kazakhstan, Borat says “ We worship the hawk” —  a joke lost on all those who do not know the symbolism of birds in the  Sufi-influenced Islam of Kazakhstan.  Films do not lend themselves to footnotes suggesting reading Farid al-Din  Attar (died 1229)

The  Conference of the Birds  in  which the King of the birds is the
sovereign lord of creation.  When the birds meet the King, whose  essence is incomprehensible, they come into the light that is more resplendent  than a thousand suns.

The Naqshbandi order of Sufis, whose influence on Central Asian culture is great, places its emphasis on advancing from the coarse to the subtle, from the hawk to the light of a thousand suns. So, of course, Borat is correct; it is better to explain to Americans that the Kazakh worship the hawk than to try to  explain the formless light of a thousand  suns.

Although there is a deep Sufi tradition in Central Asia, there is also a narrowness which rejects all that it is not used to, especially in the realm of the spiritual.  Thus, just as the United Nations was celebrating the 25th anniversary  of its declaration on religious liberty (Declaration on the Elimination of All  Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief), the  Kazakh police with bulldozers were knocking down the houses of the only Here  Krishna commune in the country, leaving people in the cold and refusing to renew  the visa of members who were not Kazakh.  

The commune of 66 houses and gardens, some 40 kms (25 miles) from
the commercial capital Almaty, has been under government-led pressure for some time.  An effort to destroy houses  in April was stopped only by the presence of too many local journalists.

At the start of this operation, November 21, the roads were blocked by
police. Journalists and observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) were turned away.  Power needed for lights and heat in the commune was cut off.

The International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), popularly
called the Hare Krishnas from their repeated chanting of the name Krishna had created a farming commune with one of the  houses used as a temple until a larger structure could be built. People came  from other Central Asian countries, often getting into trouble on their return  home.  

Other Central Asian states are no more tolerant of spiritual forms they do not understand than are the Kazakhs.

One of the ironies of the situation is that the Naqshbandi Sufi order in Kazakhstan uses nearly the same technique of spiritual enlightenment as the Hare Krishna, the constant repetition of the name of the Highest (Allah) but silently.  The letters of the name of the Highest are visualized as written on the heart; the Sufi concentrates on the letters by repetition of the name until in his vision the letters become red, with repeated repetition the letters become white, and later, green.  Then the exercise is repeated with the letters visualized on the throat, then the  forehead, and finally the crown of the head – the path of the kundalini charkas  in Hinduism.

The Central Asian states are all sensitive about religious movements over which they have no control.  They  fear that such movements can become havens for political demands that cannot  find outlets in the limited political party activities.  People dressed in orange robes, chanting  “Hare Krishna” to drum beats must be hiding  something.
If  Borat is not to add to  the fictional hunting of Jews in Kazakhstan with the real hunting of the Hare  Krishna, then the Kazakh government must quickly alter its policy and respect  the UN declaration on religious liberty to which it is  bound.