See more
Publication date: 16.05.2024
Changing the subordination of the religious community: analysis of the resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine
Introduction
On April 3, 2024, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine adopted a resolution in case No. 906/1330/21, which concerns the change of subordination of a religious community and amendments to its charter. This decision is an important precedent in the sphere of regulation of religious issues in Ukraine, as it highlights the mechanisms and criteria by which religious communities can change their subordination in canonical and organizational matters. In this article, we will consider in detail the circumstances of the case, the arguments of the parties and the conclusions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.
The circumstances of the case
The abbot of the religious community appealed to the court with a claim to invalidate the protocol of the general meeting and the charter of the religious community, adopted at this meeting in a new version. The main issue was the decision of the general meeting to change the subordination of the religious community in canonical and organizational matters by joining the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU).
The plaintiff claimed that the general meeting was convened by unauthorized persons, and the decision to change the subordination and make the corresponding changes to the charter was made by persons who were not members of the religious community. Courts of first and appellate instances refused to grant the claim, which prompted the abbot to appeal to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.
Legislative regulation
The legislator recognized the autonomy of the religious community in determining the number of its members necessary for its general assembly to be recognized as authoritative, as well as in matters of membership.In the absence of a procedure for admission to members of the community defined in the charter of the religious community, the criteria established in the charter, which were to be met by the members of the religious community who participated in its general meeting and made the disputed decision on changing the subordination in canonical matters, are taken into account.
Conclusions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court
1. Autonomy of religious communities
The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court noted that the decision to change the affiliation of a religious community concerns the right to freedom of religion in its collective dimension. This right includes the provision of free opportunity to practice one's religion, to observe religious practices and religious rites both individually and together with others of the same faith.
2. Decision-making mechanism
The legislator has established a mechanism according to which the decision to change the affiliation and make relevant changes to the charter is adopted by at least two-thirds of the number of members of the religious community required for its general assembly to be recognized as authoritative. Such meetings can be convened by members of the community without the need to obtain consent from the hierarch of the religious organization from which the community intends to leave.
3. Mandatory neutrality of the state
The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court emphasized that the legislative order should not make the recognition of a religious community dependent on the will of the recognized church authority, which may resist such a decision. This would violate the principle of neutrality and impartiality of the state in relations with various religions, confessions and beliefs.
4.Recognition of decisions of religious communities
The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court emphasized that the state's recognition of the right to free change of affiliation by a religious community cannot violate the right of the superior or members of the community to freedom of religion. The legislator regulated the procedure for exercising the right to change affiliation only in general terms, leaving religious communities considerable autonomy in determining internal rules and membership.
5. Membership criteria
In this case, the charter of the religious community did not establish a clear procedure and criteria for accepting members into the community, nor did it contain the concept of fixed membership. When defining the criteria that members of the religious community had to meet, the court took into account the requirements for members of the parish assembly established in the 1991 statute: reaching the age of 18 and regularly attending religious services.
The lack of data on regular attendance at religious services was compensated for by taking into account the territorial connection, that is, living in the area where a religious community operates. This was in accordance with canon law and ensured the condition of regular attendance at religious services. You may be interested in the following articles: lawyer's consultation lawyer's consultation document analysis legal analysis of the situation written consultation document verification by a lawyer lawyers documents lawyer's help online lawyer online legal opinion legal opinion of a lawyer lawyer online
