Interaction of the Prosecutor's Office with Religious Organizations

Kovalev Artem Aleksandrovich PhD in Law Associate Professor, Department of Prosecutorial Activity, Ural State Law University 620137, Russia, Sverdlovskaya oblast', g. Ekaterinburg, ul. Komsomol'skaya, 21 artem.kovalev.1978.kovalev@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Despite the fact that the Constitution of the Russian Federation defines the Russian Federation as a secular state, the influence of religious organizations on the social and legal situation in society is so significant that at present there is a need to consider the problem of the negative impact of such organizations on the security of both the individual and the state and society, as well as their interaction with state bodies.

It is no secret that along with law-abiding religious organizations in Russia there are organizations that violate the law and (or) call for illegal behavior. Recently, the number of criminal cases initiated in connection with the commission of terrorist and extremist crimes by religious organizations has increased significantly. There is also an increase in the number of religious organizations and associations that violate the constitutional rights of citizens ^{[1, p.76]}.

It is noted that among the crimes of terrorist and extremist orientation, a significant share is occupied by crimes committed for religious reasons ^{[2, p.129]}, in connection with which the importance of cooperation between the prosecutor's office and religious organizations in the field of prevention of these violations increases.

Traditionally, it was believed that since the beginning of the existence of the Russian Federation as an independent state – after the collapse of the Soviet Union – a separation model in relations between religious organizations and the state, designated by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, has been implemented in Russia. At the same time, we can agree with the opinion of V. A. Zverev and M. O. Shakhov that recently there have been trends in the sphere of interaction between authorities and religious organizations that allow us to talk about "the transformation of the system of state-confessional relations from a separative to a cooperative model" ^[3,4].

The issues of interaction between religious organizations and state bodies, including in the legal sphere, have previously been the subject of analysis of scientific publications. At the same time, the researchers noted the lack of certainty of the direction, forms and methods of such interaction ^[5,6,7].

The importance of optimizing the legal regulation of cooperation between the Prosecutor's office and religious organizations is beyond doubt, since it is an integral part of the system of crime prevention, combating extremism, terrorism, and corruption. It is obvious that solving the tasks that the prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies face in this area can be carried out more effectively using not only their own forces and means, but also the capabilities of religious organizations.

Religious organizations have a great potential for countering crime due to the fact that they are carriers and active distributors of anti-criminal views and norms of human behavior. It is noted that meetings and other events held jointly by the prosecutor's office and representatives of religious organizations attract public attention ^{[8, p.33]}.

The need to organize and develop cooperation between the Prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies with religious organizations was noted in the "Comprehensive Plan for Countering the Ideology of Terrorism in the Russian Federation for 2019-2023" (approved by the President of the Russian Federation on December 28, 2018, N Pr-2665), which provides for the participation of representatives of religious organizations in many activities established by this plan.

It is worth noting that the interaction of the Prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies with religious organizations is becoming more and more widespread ^[9]. At the same time, the existing legal mechanisms do not allow us to sufficiently realize all the possibilities of cooperation between the prosecutor's office and religious organizations in the field of countering offenses, and a unified systematic approach to organizing interaction with religious associations has not yet been developed.

This is largely due to the lack of proper legal regulation of the forms and methods of interaction between the Prosecutor's office and religious organizations.

It is worth noting that in science the concept of interaction of state bodies with other entities is considered in a narrow and broad sense. Thus, I. V. Fedorova, in fact, defines interaction only as cooperation, pointing out that the method used by state bodies in its implementation is a method of coordinating joint efforts, which is not usually used by bodies in the implementation of their direct competence in relation to external entities ^{[10, p.187]}.  

Other authors, for example, M. M. Gorshkov and A. B. Sokolov, consider interaction as mutual relations of its subjects as a whole ^{[11, p.118]}.   In this case, it covers other areas of activity of the state body, and, accordingly, includes forms and methods inherent in both cooperation with other entities and the activities that the state body carries out to achieve the goals of its creation.

It is obvious that the concept of interaction in a broad sense most fully reflects all aspects of the contact of state bodies with other entities and, in particular, with religious organizations. At the same time, it is cooperation that has a significant specificity of forms and methods of implementation and is the least regulated.

With regard to the interaction in a broad sense carried out by the Prosecutor's Office with religious organizations, two directions can be distinguished: supervision of the implementation of laws by religious organizations and cooperation with these organizations on issues of combating violations of the law.

The first of them is covered by the Law on the Prosecutor's Office within the exercise of its supervisory powers in relation to supervised entities (which, in accordance with part 1 of Article 21 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, include governing bodies and heads of religious organizations). When checking the enforcement of laws by religious organizations, the prosecutor has the right to apply all the powers granted to him by the Law on the Prosecutor's Office.

When exercising these powers, the specifics of the activities of religious organizations should be taken into account. Thus, in particular, when exercising their right to freely enter the territory of the inspected object, the prosecutor entering the premises in which a religious organization conducts worship or other religious rites and ceremonies should respect those present without offending their religious feelings and without violating the right of believers to freedom of religion, if the ceremonies are held and the rites are carried out without violating the law. Similarly, other supervisory powers of the prosecutor should be implemented when checking the legality of the activities of religious organizations.

The concept of the method of prosecutorial supervision has not been unambiguously defined in science. In general, the method of carrying out activities is understood as a way or means of solving the tasks facing the prosecutor. 

The most widespread position is that the method of prosecutorial supervision is a prosecutor's check. This opinion is shared by G. G. Anisimov ^{[12, p.18]}, V. F. Kryukov ^{[13, p.88]} and others.

 It is impossible to agree with the position identifying the method with the prosecutor's inspection, since such an understanding of the method of prosecutor's supervision limits it only to the actual inspection, excluding from it the use of other means of prosecutor's supervision, for example, means of reaction.

There are other opinions. For example, M. B. Kabanova points out that the exercise by the prosecutor of his powers in the exercise of supervisory activities is a method of prosecutorial supervision in the form of detecting violations of the law or responding to it ^{[14, p.194]}.  

G. V. Dytchenko notes that the concept of "method" of prosecutorial supervision is close to the concept of "means" of prosecutorial supervision, pointing out that, nevertheless, a means should be understood as a certain material substance – for example, an act of the prosecutor's response, and under the method – the order of its use, chosen by the prosecutor depending on the specific situation ^{[15, p.148]}.

These positions do not allow us to single out the method of prosecutorial supervision as a whole, since they are based on the use of individual powers or legal means of the prosecutor, therefore, with a comprehensive study of the powers and legal means used by the prosecutor's office, it can be concluded that when exercising prosecutorial supervision, the prosecutor's office uses methods of coercion and persuasion used in the activities of state bodies.

 One can agree with the opinion of N. V. Melnikov, who points to the use of coercion in the activities of the prosecutor's office in the event of the cancellation of disciplinary penalties in places of detention of detainees – the presentation of mandatory requirements due to the fact that the fulfillment of these requirements does not depend on the will of the supervised subject, the requirements for the elimination of violations of the law to the investigator, and the use of persuasion when sending a protest or submission to the supervised subject, who do not have the obligation to directly fulfill the prosecutor's requirement to cancel the act or eliminate the violation ^{[16, p.776]}.

As for the forms of supervision, they are traditionally divided into detecting violations of the law and responding to them ^{[15, p.8]}.

The second area of cooperation between the Prosecutor's Office and religious organizations – cooperation – is not regulated by the Law on the Prosecutor's Office.

Departmental legal acts also do not pay due attention to this issue. The acts of the Prosecutor General regarding the regulation of interaction with the public pay attention mainly to interaction with the media. So, if the Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 34 of 04.03.2008, which had become invalid, regulating the interaction of the Prosecutor's office with public organizations, provided for at least the consolidation of annual personal meetings of the heads of the prosecutor's office with representatives of public organizations, then the current Order of the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia dated 17.05.2018.  No. 296 only indicates to the prosecutors of the subjects the need for active interaction with public associations, and the frequency of events held with the participation of representatives of public organizations and the designation of the basics of interaction with public organizations is determined only for the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation.

The method of interaction of the Prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies with religious organizations in such a direction as cooperation has practically not been the subject of scientific research. While generally supporting the above position of I. V. Fedorova regarding the use of the method of coordinating joint efforts in the implementation of cooperation between the prosecutor's office and religious organizations, it can be noted that the method of persuasion in this area of cooperation also finds its application.

The forms of interaction of the Prosecutor's office with religious organizations in the implementation of cooperation in science were not distinguished. As for the forms of interaction between state bodies and public organizations in general, it is worth noting a significant spread of opinions on this issue.

 Thus, S. A. Vasiliev identifies information exchange, joint legal education of citizens, participation of public organizations in decision-making by state bodies as forms of interaction ^{[17, p.8]}. S. D. Budak approaches the issue in a similar way, highlighting: informing; consulting; taking into account the opinion of the public; involving the public in the implementation of decisions ^{[18, p.18]}. This position seems to be too generalized and is rather a grouping of forms of interaction.

 Other authors adhere to a different approach and distinguish separate forms of interaction. For example, Yu.N. Turygin highlights: joint participation in meetings and meetings; joint participation in preventive measures; joint preparation of draft regulations; mutual exchange of information; methodological, advisory assistance ^{[19, p.11]}. V. V. Grib names among the forms: the development and signing of agreements between authorities and public organizations; civil forums, conferences, hearings and others ^{[20, p.156]}.

In order to identify the most effective forms of interaction between the prosecutor's office and religious organizations, it is necessary to turn to the study of forms of cooperation carried out by state bodies in practice. Thus, the meetings held by prosecutors with representatives of the clergy on the legal regulation of interethnic and interfaith relations, as well as on countering the propaganda of offenses with religious overtones, and countering the dissemination of information about it on the Internet, have proven themselves well. At these meetings, the causes and conditions conducive to the commission of such crimes are discussed, measures to prevent and counteract these crimes are discussed ^[21]. At such meetings, employees of the Prosecutor's Office also explain to representatives of religious organizations the provisions of laws regulating the issues of countering illicit drug trafficking and extremism. With the assistance of religious organizations, the Prosecutor's Office is developing questionnaires for citizens, on the basis of which drug trafficking offenses are currently being monitored.

The spheres of interaction between the prosecutor's office and religious organizations have substantial specifics depending on the confessional affiliation of a religious organization. Thus, during the interaction of the Prosecutor's office with representatives of Orthodoxy, measures are being taken to prevent the involvement of minors in illegal religious organizations, to rehabilitate those convicted of extremist crimes. In cooperation with Muslim religious organizations, work is being carried out to prevent crimes motivated by radicalism and extremism ^[22]. Together with Jewish religious organizations, measures are being taken to prevent manifestations of offenses committed on national and religious grounds.

The process of interaction of law enforcement agencies with religious organizations is more active in states where the influence of representatives of the Muslim religion is strong. Thus, in the Kyrgyz Republic, constant interaction of representatives of the Prosecutor's Office and other law enforcement agencies with representatives of religious organizations has already been established. One of its main directions is explanatory work.

The beginning of the legal regulation of interaction in Kyrgyzstan was laid by the Concept of Interaction of the Department of Internal Affairs with Religious Organizations adopted in 2009, according to which mobile analytical centers were created locally, with the help of which appropriate preventive measures were carried out locally. Religious organizations that enjoy the greatest influence on the population were involved in their work. The work of such centers has demonstrated high efficiency, and their experience has been disseminated among other law enforcement agencies. Religious organizations participating in their work monitor the ethnic and religious situation, and therefore have information about upcoming offenses in this area and the factors contributing to their commission, which allows in many cases to prevent the commission of offenses ^{[23, p.100]}. It seems that this experience can be positively perceived by Russian law enforcement agencies.

Effective forms of interaction are also the prompt exchange of current information on the state of legality in the field of countering crimes and other offenses, a two-way analysis of the current situation in this area with the preparation of information letters. The use of these forms of interaction will contribute not only to the timely suppression of offenses, but also to the elimination of their causes, and will also allow you to predict the actions necessary to prevent crimes and proposals to improve the state of legality.

An effective form of interaction is an agreement on interaction with religious organizations, concluded in practice by some prosecutor's offices and other law enforcement agencies.  Such agreements are concluded between the authorities both at the federal and regional levels ^{[24, 25]}. However, this form of interaction with public organizations is not provided for by the current legislation on the prosecutor's office, and therefore cannot be considered legitimate. Such agreements as a form of interaction are used by the prosecutor's office in relations with other bodies. The vast majority of them are concluded by the prosecutor's office with state bodies. However, there are also examples of such agreements with non-profit organizations. An example is the "Agreement on Cooperation between the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs and the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation" (concluded in Moscow on 12.12.2011).

In practice, the positive domestic and foreign experience of cooperation between the Prosecutor's office and law enforcement agencies with religious organizations is also being generalized. Positive results are obtained by conducting educational events (meetings, conferences) to disseminate information about the possibilities of preventing crimes of extremist and religious orientation and countering them. The possibility of implementing this form could be fixed by law and the application would be carried out with the help of agreements on cooperation between the prosecutor's office and religious organizations.

The Prosecutor's office may also perceive the positive experience of interaction between the administrations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation with religious organizations, which consists in the fact that many administrations have created divisions or appointed officials who interact with religious associations ^{[26, 27]}. Such units (subject) receive information from public and religious organizations with data on violations of the law.

Based on the analysis of the practice of interaction and the positions of scientists, the following forms of interaction can be distinguished in such a direction as cooperation: information support of interaction, including monitoring the state of interfaith relations; implementation of legal education of the population aimed at informing citizens about the activities of religious organizations in terms of the inadmissibility of violations of laws; holding regular meetings with representatives of religious organizations on legal issues and the implementation of explanatory work on the inadmissibility of committing offenses, mainly on religious grounds, among believers; development of methodological recommendations for the prevention of the spread of radical ideology among believers; clarification of the provisions of normative legal acts providing for legal responsibility for committing offenses motivated by ideological, national or religious hatred or enmity; conclusion of agreements on cooperation; creation of mobile analytical centers.

Based on the results of the study, the following conclusions can be drawn.

The interaction of the Prosecutor's Office with religious organizations is carried out within the framework of two main directions – prosecutor's supervision over the execution of laws and cooperation. For each of them, based on the analysis of scientists' points of view and existing practice, methods and forms of their implementation were identified. The paper notes that the first of them is regulated by the legal norms of chapter 1 of Section III of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, however, the application of these norms in the supervision of the execution of laws by religious organizations should be carried out taking into account the specifics of their activities. At the same time, it is necessary to introduce norms into the Law on the Prosecutor's Office that enshrine the duty of interaction of the prosecutor's office with public, including religious, organizations and directions of such interaction.

As for the second direction, the Order of the Prosecutor General should reflect the order and the main forms of interaction between the Prosecutor's Office and religious organizations, as well as determine the procedure for providing information about persons promoting terrorist and extremist ideas.