Standing On Opposite Sides

Vart Land

January 19, 2024

By Jor Hjulstad Tvedt

On Friday, the parties went their separate ways in the Oslo District Court, after the two-week dispute between the state and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Ben Elder and Jan Frode Nilsen have followed the case from different sides.

On Friday, the parties made their closing statements in the trial between Jehovah’s Witnesses and the state in the Oslo district court. The court has now withdrawn and the case has been taken up for judgment. Vårt Land has spoken to two of those who have followed the case closely this week – from different sides.

Jan Frode Nilsen is a former member of the organisation, and was himself summoned as a witness for the state. Ben Elder is legal advisor at the European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses for the Protection of Religious Freedom, an organization that works against the judiciary and public authorities to defend the interests of the religious community.

Jan Frode Nilsen says that it has been difficult to follow Jehovah’s Witnesses’ procedures in recent days. It is presented as if everything you have experienced and the history you carry with you is only inside your own head, he says. He says that he is primarily surprised at how far Jehovah’s Witnesses go in denying that there is a set doctrine on how the excluded should be treated. At the same time, he feels that the religious community’s lawyers waver on the question. In one moment they admit that there is a practice, in the next they say they don’t. Actually, I think there should be no doubt about what is the fact, and that the interesting question is the legal one.

(EX-WITNESS: Jan Frode Nilsen has been one of the state’s witnesses in court)

International attention

Regardless of the outcome, Nilsen believes that there is much to be learned from this case. That is why it is also followed very closely by ex-witnesses all over the world, he says. By claiming that there is no correct practice, and that it is up to each individual member to decide how to deal with excluded members , Nilsen believes that Jehovah’s Witnesses have made statements that will have international significance.

 They have squeezed the toothpaste out of the tube, and they will never be able to put it back. And there is nothing we want more than that. He also says that what emerges in court runs completely counter to what emerges in the Watchtower, the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ own magazine. That is why they want to shield Jehovah’s Witnesses’ publications from the presentation of evidence, and say that they are “sacred texts” that the state cannot interpret. It is because they know what is written there.

Self-therapeutic

For him and the other ex-witnesses, it is not primarily about winning in court, says Nilsen. According to him, whether Jehovah’s Witnesses lose state support is a trivial matter. Many of those who have testified in court have never told their story in that way before, he says that this in itself has had great significance. He also says that he and the other ex-Witnesses have found it strange to hear how Jehovah’s Witnesses present themselves as a vulnerable minority. – Because on an individual level, we are the ones who have been the minority. Individuals in the face of a worldwide organization that has billions on its books and millions of members.

Nilsen also says that he thinks the government lawyers have done a good job. According to him, they have remained calm, and resisted what he sees as a strategy of obfuscating and confusing by highlighting irrelevant points and examples: Jehovah’s Witnesses want to angle this as a matter of religious persecution. There I feel that the lawyers have been good at saying: “Relax, it’s not about that, it’s about a state support scheme”.

Not aware of other cases

Ben Elder has been a witness for Jehovah’s Witnesses, and says that the organization he represents is often a third party in European court cases. They also work to spread understanding of the challenges Jehovah’s Witnesses face among public actors and human rights actors. They have followed the case between the state and Jehovah’s Witnesses in Norway since it started in 2022. Is the case unique in a European context? Yes and no, similar accusations have been made in the past. What is unique, however, is how far it has gone, and that the registration as a religious community has already been withdrawn. I don’t think that has happened in any other European country so far. It is new waters for us, and to be honest we were very surprised by the State Administrator and the ministry’s decision.

According to Elder, the organization sees increasing activity among so-called “anti-cult” organizations in Europe. According to Elder, these are organizations that have been created with the purpose of attacking religious minorities, by claiming that they are second-rate religions and harmful to society. The same rhetoric is repeated in every country, with exactly the same wording.

(Assessor: Ben Elder is legal adviser for the European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses for the Protection of Religious Freedom, and has followed the case in court together with Jehovah’s Witnesses’ lawyers.)

Believes the state has weak evidence

When asked if he is confident that the court will take their side, Elder replies that he is confident that the case is based on solid legal arguments. But when it comes to the outcome, everything depends on what the judge chooses to emphasize, he says. Do the stories that have come out in the ex-witnesses’ statements make an impression on you? Yes, of course, when people have bad experiences and are distressed mentally it’s a terrible situation to be in. But to say that this is due to our religion… That’s where we struggle a bit.

He also says that the state has not produced evidence for one of its main arguments, namely that the organization excludes minors, and in that way exercises psychological violence against children. – The only evidence the state has presented that minors are excluded was one case nearly 30 years ago. If that’s all, then it’s too little to say it’s a big problem.

Integrated into society

But even if you vouch for the fact that these are individual stories, and that legally there is nothing to complain about. Do you think that you could still do something about how you treat former members, so that fewer had bad experiences? – It’s a good question, and I feel it was answered by the religious community when the State Administrator said that Jehovah’s Witnesses must change their practice in order to get support. We can’t, because it’s based on our understanding of the Bible, and our strong conviction about what it says, Elder replies. He adds that the organization will “naturally” comply with national legislation, but that he is confident that the current legislation is on their side.

You are often called a closed religious community. What do you think about it? Personally, I think it’s ridiculous, but we often hear that, yes. We do not live in isolation, we have TV, internet and participate in community life. Compared to many other religious communities, Elder believes that Jehovah’s Witnesses are very integrated into society. We send our children to the same schools as everyone else, we are your neighbors and your colleagues. We even stand on your doormat, and on Saturday mornings we stand on street corners, he says with a smile. The verdict is expected to be ready in about two weeks.