[Thanks to Institute on Religion & Public Policy for the lead.]Given the primary religious nature of the applicant’s activities and the general policy as set out in the Concept of National Security of the Russian Federation, that is to say that foreign missionaries posed a threat to national security, the Court considered it established that Mr Nolan's banning from Russia had been designed to repress the exercise of his right to freedom of religion. However, since the interests of national security were deliberately omitted as a permitted ground for restrictions on the exercise of the right to freedom of religion in Article 9 of the Convention, such interests could not be relied upon as a justification for the measures taken by the Russian authorities against Mr Nolan.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Friday, February 13, 2009
European Court Says Russia Violated Rights of Unification Church Missionary
Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights in Nolan and K. v. Russia, (ECHR, Feb. 12, 2009), ruled that Russia violated Sec. 1, Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), as well as various other provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, when it refused to readmit to the country an American missionary. Patrick Francis Nolan had worked in the country for 8 years with youth organizations affiliated with the Unification Church. Russia claimed that Nolan had engaged in activities that posed a security threat. However it never specified the nature of those activities. As summarized by the Court's press release on the decision: