INFORMATION LETTER OF DEFENSE LAWYER
on the criminal case instituted against Elizaveta Eugenievna Drenicheva, charged with repeatedly popularizing idea of people’s deficiency in regard to their social belonging and generic assignment under Article no. 164, p. 2 of the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan
By following the order of the first deputy head of the Department of National Security of Kazakhstan for Almaty – A. A. Ashimov – dated March 25 2008 and approved by the Almaty City’s Prosecutor – D. I. Baytukbayev, on April 1st, 4th, 8th and 14th E. V. Ryzhkov, a national security police officer, secretly filmed 5-hour seminar conducted by the member of the Religious Alliance “Unification Church”, E. E. Drenicheva, for 4 invited visitors.
The shorthand report prepared by national security police officer R. B. Mukhamedzhnov on the film was assumed for psychological and philological expertise. The expertise was made by A. E. Svankulov, a philologist, and D. R. Musina, an expert in religion, from the Center for Forensic Expertise, as well as E. E. Burova, an employee of the Institute for Philosophy and Law under Education and Science Ministry of Kazakhstan, invited to make one time expertise. There were two expert evaluations performed within the case, which are the primary expertise under no. 6141, dated 17.06.2008, and additional expertise under no. 6978, dated 30.07.2008 (with participation of Zh. A. Baysalbayev – expert in politics, political science docent of the Contemporary Kazakh-Russian Humanitarian University, and A. A. Ustimneko – expert in politics and Editor-in-Chief of “KazEnergy” Magazine).
According to the conclusion of the expert in philology, the evidences assumed for expertise don’t contain calls for breaking constitutional order and Unification of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as idea of necessity to perform some violent activities.
According to the conclusion of the expert in religion, the evidences assumed for expertise contain ideas common for a neo Christian alliance which belongs to new non-traditional cults of “Unification Church”.
E. E. Burova, PhD and professor concluded that the records contain as follows: a) propaganda of the idea of the people’s deficiency in regard to their generic assignment, b) propaganda of the idea of the people’s deficiency in regard to their social belonging. The performed report on the film doesn’t contain propaganda of the idea of people’s uniqueness, superiority or deficiency in regard to their belonging to different religions, nationalities or races. The report includes signs of negative impact on a personality, family, society, as well as moral and ethic foundations of the state.
As E. E. Burova thinks, the propaganda of the idea of people’s deficiency in regard to their generic assignment was represented by E. E. Drenicheva through promoting idea of “perfect” human being who establishes relations with God and other people, by understanding his responsibility to create conditions for the Messiah’s arrival; who achieves perfection by serving to God; who belongs to Church.
From the opinion of E. E. Burova, propaganda of the idea of people’s deficiency in regard to their belonging to family as a social group was represented by E. E. Drenicheva through creating negative image of secular family that is opposed to “perfect” and “ideal” family based on the principle of loving God, which appears to be main one when creating relationships between husband, wife and kids. Therefore, the actual personal relations within family are meant to be replaced with the relations with God. As a fact, the latter relations are non real; they mutilate perception of the reality, as well as the way of thinking in general. Thus, such kind of relations contradicts the system of secular values, existing within the society, formed by means of the official education system, traditions of the family education, socializing processes in the secular society and law-base state, as well as general conditions of social and individual life in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The additional philological and politological expertise showed the same results as the primary expertise did.
E. E. Burova, examined upon the case, testified that she became Candidate of Philosophy Science (“Ontology, dialectics and theory of knowledge” as a major course, on the thesis titled “Unification of the Marxism concept of determinism”). She worked in IPK of KazNU, the Institution of Drama, and High Party School. In 2001 she received her PhD degree in “Ontology, dialectics and theory of knowledge” on “Commensuration of social and humanitarian disciplinarity”. She also worked in RKP NGOOC “Bobek”, in the Institution for Harmonic Development of Humanity and Institution of Philosophy and Political sciences under Education and Science Ministry of Kazakhstan (since 2006).
Explaining the meaning of her conclusions to the investigator within the inquiry, she testified that the idea of deficiency on principle of generic assignment is represented through permanent and open division of people on so called “perfect” and “non-perfect” to show the inability of the latter and advantages of the former. Deficiency related to belonging to classes is represented by the followers of the movement through artificial creation of non-real division of people (perfect or non-perfect, saved or lost) and social groups, including family institution (“true”, “ideal” families and “non-ideal” families).
According to Zh. A. Baysalova, “in order to promote the idea of people’s deficiency on principle of belonging to human race, E. E. Drenicheva in her lectures insisted on the idea that a human being is non-perfect due to his belonging to human race, which causes his deficiency as “non-perfect” one. She also tried to compare such person with “perfect” (chosen) being who must devote his life to God. On recognizing his non-perfection, a man should understand and devote his life to arrival of the Messiah. Such statement is very dangerous for a personality, as it can cause a person to degrade, to loose his/her social and moral values (it’s very important to mention here that the visitors of the lectures are mainly young people). By saying that “not all of the people can achieve the perfection, the lecturer divides people in two groups: those who devoted to God and those who stay remote (non-perfect people).
Concerning the propaganda of the idea that people are deficient in their belonging to social groups, it can be said that the lecturer paid close attention at comparing such meanings as “perfect” and “non-perfect” person, “saved” and “lost”, “true” and “non-true” families. Within the conditions of the modern Kazakhstan’s society where a family is expected to be secular, the movement compares it to “ideal” family which is based on love towards God. They break the fundamental perception of institution of family and marriage, based on human nature (love, understanding, tolerance and etc.) The lectures of E. E. Drenicheva are aimed against civil, legal, family relations existing in Kazakhstan, calling in question the process of person’s socializing in our society. Moreover, the lecturer applied the movement’s ideology to promote the ideas among young people who are not aware enough of social issues yet, which represents threat in the field of information and ideology safety of our society, Zh. A. Baysalbayeva concluded.
D. E. Uzakov and M. K. Khudaykulov, witnesses examined within the investigation procedures, testified that statements of E. E. Drenicheva “humiliated person’s dignity, as all of the seminar’s participants were persuaded that a person initially is meant to be non-perfect, sinful. In order to become pure and better, a person should create true family; strive for becoming true person, with help of the movement headed by reverend San Men Mun. Besides, she said than San Men Mun and his wife are true parents who managed to create family that is perfect example, by which they decreased the dignity of other parents who don’t take San Men Mun as an example and who are not members of the movement”.
On the basis of the above materials, on June 28th 2008 D. Bazarbauev, an investigator of the ID of NSCD, instituted criminal case against E. E. Drenicheva under Article no. 164 p. 2 of the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan (Repeatedly popularizing idea of people’s deficiency in regard to their social belonging and generic assignment). From July 2 to 4 she was kept in the investigational jail of the NSC. On July 4th he was refused of arrest warrant by the Deputy Prosecutor of Almaty, took back E. E. Drenicheva’s written pledge not to leave the city, accused her of the above mentioned article, completed the case on September 12th and directed her case though the prosecutor of the Almaty City to the Almalinskiy District’s Court of Almaty.
Z. B. Keykibasova, the judge of this court, appointed the hearings on October 24th, 10:30 a. m., Sharipova St. 62.
The investigator refused the defender of his appeal to appoint the additional expertise and gave back the conclusion of S. Y. Kolchigin (PhD, professor, head of the Department of Onthology and Theory of Knowledge of the Philosophy and Politology Institute of Education and Science Ministry, winner of Ch. Valikhanov Award).
The specialist concluded that “family” means community based on the same origin. The same meaning is used in the jurisdiction (please, refer to Article no. 164 of the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan). Therefore, the word “family” is used not only to name community of close relatives and etc, but also to indicate that the humanity is the one family.
In its activities the Unification Church promotes the idea of uniting people as representatives of human kind on the basis of the only spiritual values. So, nothing can be said that the movement promotes the idea of “perfection or non-perfection in regard to belonging to social group”. According to the movement, all people are considered as children of one Father (the same is in Christianity). In other words, they have common origin.
The meaning of social belonging has clear idea. Social group is a community based on the common social origin. Social group is a group of people with certain rights and responsibilities, fixed by traditions or laws and passed from one generation to another. The idea of social groups proposed definitive hierarchy within the society, related to gaps in privileges and statuses. At the same time, under the idea of “ideal family” the followers of the Unification Church mean the whole humanity having internal Unification and close spiritual relations between each other, but not some exclusive group of people. Also the conclusions of Mr. Kolchigin contain other facts.
The p. 2 of the Article no. 164 of the Criminal Code assumes from 2 to 6 years’ imprisonment, which appears to be very strict punishment for E. E. Drenicheva who sees her duty in supporting the moral values of the society.
B. O. Idrisov,
Defense lawyer,
October 19, 2008