| Parliamentary Commission About Cults In France |
Article Index for Parliamentary |
Website Links For Parliamentary |
Information AboutParliamentary Commission About Cults In France |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSION ON CULTS IN FRANCE | |
| government anti-cult measures | |
| politics of france | |
| contemporary french history | |
| religion in france | |
| parliamentary reports | |
|
Subsequent French Parliamentary Commissions on cults reported in 1999 and in 2006. In 2005 the then Prime Minister of France, in a '' Circulaire '' which stressed on-going vigilance in the fight against cults, suggested that due to changes in cult behavior and organization the list of specific cults (which formed a part of the 1995 report) had become less pertinent. The Prime Minister asked his civil servants in certain cases to avoid depending on generic lists of cult groups but instead to apply criteria set in consultation with the Interministerial Commission for Monitoring and Combating Cultic Deviances ( MIVILUDES ). COMMISSION OF 1995 The published report of the Parliamentary Commission of 1995 (also known as the ''Rapport Gest-Guyard''), appeared on 22 December 1995. It remains to This Day one of the few official attempts in the world to categorize various movements according to the potential threat they may present. Some non-French-citizens and certain organizations criticized its categorization-methodology as such. Critics included the Church Of Scientology , which did not want to see itself classified as a cult (which nevertheless occurred in the end). The Parliamentary Commission always bore in mind the difficulties of establishing any Objective classification, although it never called into question the actual ethical and political imperatives of doing so, especially in the wake of the Order of the Solar Temple "mass suicides" and other dangerous cult activities occurring around the world (such as, for example, the 1995 poison-gas attack in Tokyo's subway by the Aum Shinrikyo cult). The Commission held various hearings with persons involved in new-religious-movement activities or involved in Anti-cult Movement s, and had the French Secret Service '' Renseignements Généraux '' give it lists of NRM activities and memberships. For an expurgated, alphabeticized list of entities (with name-translations) included in the 1995 report, see List Of Groups Referred To As Cults In Government Reports . COMMISSION OF 1999 A further French parliamentary commission reported in 1999 on cults in connection with money and the economy. THIRD-PARTY COMMENTS, 2000 The Clinton Administration In the United States of America criticized the Parliamentary commission. Paris reacted in turn by criticizing this perceived interference in French internal matters, and by noting the importance of political funds donated by New Religious Movement s to Political Parties in the US. The 2000 annual report of the United States Commission On International Religious Freedom , released by the Bureau Of Democracy, Human Rights, And Labor of the U.S. Department Of State , stated:
THIRD-PARTY COMMENTS, 2004 In its 2004 annual report, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom stated:
The 2004 report concluded with an assessment that the restructuring of the main French agency concerned with this issue (referring to the new '' MIVILUDES '' replacing its predecessor, the ''Mission Interministérielle pour la Lutte contre les Sectes'' Commission to Combat the Cults (MILS)), had reportedly improved religious freedoms in France. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom Paris did not comment on this renewed interference in French internal affairs. RAFFARIN'S ''CIRCULAIRE'', 2005 On 27 May 2005 (just before he left office), the then Prime Minister Of France , Jean-Pierre Raffarin , issued a '' Circulaire '' which stressed that the government must exercise vigilance in taking account of the evolution of the cult-phenomenon, which (he wrote) made the list of movements attached to the Parliamentary Report of 1995 less and less pertinent, based on the observation that small groups form in a scattered, more mobile and less-easily identifiable manner, making use in particular of the possibilities of spreading offered by the Internet. The Prime Minister asked his civil servants to update a number of instructions issued previously, to apply criteria set in consultation with the Interministerial Commission for Monitoring and Combating Cultic Deviances ( MIVILUDES ), and to avoid falling back on lists of groups for the identification of cultic deviances. ''Circulaire du 27 mai 2005 relative à la lutte contre les dérives sectaires'' (''Circulaire'' of 27 May 2005 concerning the struggle against cultic manifestations). The Prime Minister wrote:
And:
COMMISSION OF 2006 In a press-release dated 28 June 2006, several deputies from the Socialist Party , from the UDF , and others, stated that "certain people had believed that they could celebrate a so-called turning-point in the French policy of defending individual and collective liberties against the dangerous conduct of cults and a renewed questioning of the parliamentary reports of 1995 and 1999, as a result of the appearance of the Prime Minister's ''circulaire''." ''A cette occasion, certains ont cru pouvoir se réjouir d’un soi-disant tournant dans la politique française de défense des libertés individuelles et collectives contre les menées dangereuses des sectes et d’une remise en cause des rapports parlementaires de 1995 et en 1999.'' - "La République, c'est la liberté, de penser et de croire", press-release of . The spokespersons said that the issue addressed by the Prime Minister related to the data collected in 1995 and 1999 becoming stale. ''En réalité, la question posée par le Premier ministre était celle du vieillissement des informations collectées en 1995 et 1999.'' - "La République, c'est la liberté, de penser et de croire", press-release of . They added that setting up a new Commission of Enquiry would permit a "coming to grips with a new state-of-play in the cultic movement". ''A cette occasion le vœu formulé par le groupe d’études sur les sectes donne écho aux propositions de commissions d'enquête déposées par les députés de la majorité comme de l’opposition depuis le début de la législature ... L’adoption de la proposition de résolution, à l’unanimité par la Commission puis aujourd’hui, en séance publique confirme l’engagement commun des membres de l’Assemblée, au-delà des clivages partisans, pour engager un nouvel état des lieux de la mouvance sectaire tout particulièrement dans le domaine de la santé et de la protection des mineurs.'' Translation: "On this occasion the wish formulated by the study-group on cults echoes the proposals for commissions of enquiry submitted by Members of Parliament both from the governing majority and from the Opposition since the beginning of the legislative term ... The adoption of this resolution — unanimously by the Commission, and then, today, in a public session — underlines the common commitment of the Members of the Assembly, transcending partisan divides, to address a new state-of-play in the cultic movement, and in particular in the area {Link without Title} of health and of the protection of minors." — Press-release of . On 28 June 2006, in response to a unanimous resolution of the Law Commission (''commission des lois''), the French National Assembly unanimously passed a resolution to set up a Parliamentary Commission of Enquiry into the influence of cultic movements and the consequences of their practices on the physical and mental health of minors. The 30 members of the Commission included Georges Fenech (President), Philippe Vuilque (rapporteur), Martine David and Alain Gest (Vice-Presidents) and Jean-Pierre Brard and Rudy Salle s (Secretaries). The Commission presented its report to the Assembly on 19 December 2006. The report contained 50 recommendations which aimed to protect endangered children. The President of the Commission of Enquiry, George Fenech, accused public officials (and especially the ''bureau des cultes'' of the Ministry of the Interior, of "negligence, even complaisance". He expressed his astonishment at the lack of a good definition of the profession of Psychotherapeutic s, which he described as a "mine for cults" where gurus flourish. "''M. Fenech s'étonne aussi de voir que la profession de psychothérapeute ne soit pas mieux définie alors que c'est "une mine pour les sectes" dans laquelle prospèrent les gourous, a-t-il ajouté en substance.''" — SEE ALSO REFERENCES EXTERNAL LINKS |
|
|