CFI Speaks in defense of Pussy Riot at Toronto Protest
August 17, 2012
Remarks at Pussy Riot Toronto Protest
Justin Trottier
August 17, 2012
In her closing statement, Pussy Riot member Nadezhda Tolokonnikova told the court: “It makes you want to weep to see how the methods of the medieval inquisition are brought out by the law-enforcement and judicial system of the Russian Federation.”
The Centre for Inquiry is interested in this case because so many of its issues intersect with the values we espouse, and the values we believe Canadian citizens espouse: church-state separation, free speech and the right to freely criticize religion.
This case is an unfortunate example of the dangers for any nation in violating church-state separation and mixing religion with the strong arm of government. Ironically, in protesting and raising awareness of the close ties between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian Orthodox church Pussy Riot succeeded in letting the world know exactly how close and how dangerous those ties are.
The Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian government have been almost working in tandem. The Patriarch of Moscow Kirill I had condemned Pussy Riot’s actions as “blasphemous”, saying that the “Devil has laughed at all of us ... We have no future if we allow mocking in front of great shrines.”
As if in response, the government obediently complied, charging band members with “premeditated hooliganism performed by organized group of people motivated by religious hatred or hostility”
Then as if on cue in some kind of show trial, government prosecutor Alexei Nikiforov demanded prison for the trio because they “abused God”.
When the judge handed down her verdict earlier today she stated “The content of the songs performed by the member punk band Pussy Riot, was blasphemous from the perspective of the Orthodox Church,” she said.
So this is certainly a case study in the importance of keeping religion out of state politics and removing any favouritism accorded certain faiths at the expense of those of other beliefs. Canada is not immune from granting special status to certain faith groups, whether through special charitable status status or the funding of some religious school systems, so there are lessons for us as well.
But this case also raises the vital importance of fundamental rights like the right to protest government policy without fearing arrest, and the more general right to free speech, including the right to fully criticize, satirize, and even mock religion, even to the point of offending others. There is a fundamental right to free speech and it should be recognized all around the world. There is no fundamental right to be free from being offended, and that too is something we are still needing to learn in Canada where provisions exist in various provinces to punish citizens for engaging in legitimate forms of criticism.
And so since we are here in Canada, in conclusion I would call on the Canadian government, as they create their new office of religious freedom, to incorporate into its scope the rights of non-believers to express their non-belief, and the need to balance freedom to practice religion against the right of others to criticize those beliefs without fear of retribution.
