The cassation action concerning the amendment of the Ministry’s decision in relation to the registration of the church dismissed

Panel No. 6 of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic dismissed the cassation complaint filed by the plaintiff – the Preparatory Body for the Registration of the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia against the judgment of the Regional Court in Bratislava dismissing the administrative action by which the plaintiff sought review of the legality of the decision of the Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic, by which the Minister of Culture rejected the appeal in 2018 and upheld the first-instance administrative decision. By that decision, the first-instance administrative authority refused the registration of the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia pursuant to Act No. 308/1991 Coll. on Freedom of Religious Belief and the Status of Churches and Religious Societies, as amended. 

The Court of Cassation stated in the reasoning of its decision that the administrative authorities in the present case, in the context of the registration procedure, refused the registration of the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia on two main grounds. The first ground was that the religious organisation in question did not satisfy the statutory conceptual characteristics of a church arising from Article 4(1) of Act No 308/1991 Coll., in particular, it is not a church in the sense defined in that provision of the Act, since its membership, so defined, does not satisfy the characteristics of organisation, affiliation and unambiguous structure. Moreover, the internal regulations of the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia define membership in a non-specific, vague manner and it is not possible to identify and define a member of the church in religious terms.

Panel No. 6 of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic in the context in question expressed the opinion that primarily the organisational, institutional framework of the religious organisation seeking registration is a key defining feature expressing a certain and for the purposes of registration necessary higher degree of unity, internal cohesion and outwardly in relation to society manifested in the form of a single coherent entity with clearly set rules and institutional system.

If a religious organisation does not have a sufficiently secured organisational structure at the time of the ongoing registration procedure, or if the actual organisational structure does not correspond to the organisational structure as declared in the relevant acts of the organisation in question, then it cannot be said to be an organisation in the sense of the provisions of Article 4(1) of Act No. 308/1991 Coll.

The second reason for which the registering authority did not grant the relevant application for registration of the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia was based on the finding that its establishment and activities are contrary to the principles of humanity and tolerance, whereby the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia did not meet one of the basic material conditions arising from Section 15 of Act No. 308/1991 Coll.

In that connection, the Court of Cassation pointed out that the administrative authorities had found, on the basis of the evidence taken, that the intolerant behaviour of the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia resulted in extraordinary attitudes and that the threshold of tolerance or respect for people of other faiths and religions was lower than was socially desirable and permissible. From the evidence adduced, they considered that the tendencies of authoritarian leadership, closed-mindedness, bigotry, intolerance and selection of information are clearly prevalent in the religious organisation in question, and that these tendencies are not merely peripheral but permeate the whole of the community’s activities, teachings and attitudes.

On the basis of extensive expert evidence, the administrative authorities concluded that the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia clearly exhibits the characteristics and practices of destructive religious groups and that the community is characterised by religious radicalism containing elements of incitement to religious intolerance.

In that connection, the Panel No 6 of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic stated that it had no reason to doubt the correctness of the conclusions reached by the administrative authorities on the basis of the results of the expert evidence carried out. The expert evidence was carried out in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions, and the expert reports drawn up constituted an essential basis for the Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic as an administrative authority, determining its further procedure as well as the decision itself in the context of the registration procedure.

In relation to the plaintiffs’ alleged insufficient reasoning of the defendant’s decision, the Court of Cassation stated that both contested decisions, i.e. both the first instance administrative decision and the defendant’s decision, sufficiently state in their reasoning the specific grounds on the basis of which they came to the conclusion that the Church of the Christian Communities of Slovakia does not meet the conditions for registration under Act No 308/1991 Coll. In the opinion of the Court of Cassation, the content of the first-instance administrative decision is clear from the facts, it sets out the facts on which the decision was based, what considerations guided the assessment of the evidence, how the correct reasoning was applied in the assessment of the rules on the basis of which the decision was taken and how the administrative authority dealt with the party’s substantive submissions and objections and its comments on the basis of the decision. Consequently, the defendant also dealt sufficiently with the applicant’s objections contained in the notice of appeal. The Court of Cassation therefore concludes that the defendant’s decision contested in the present action (in conjunction with the first-instance administrative decision), while referring to the relevant conclusions resulting from the sufficiently conducted evidence, can be regarded as satisfying the basic legal criteria for the statement of reasons for an administrative decision.

In conclusion, the Court of Cassation held that the decision of the Regional Court could likewise be regarded as sufficiently reasoned, stressing that the Regional Court had given a reasonably reasonable and sufficient explanation of the case, had correctly clarified the subject-matter of the dispute, had applied the relevant substantive and procedural provisions of generally applicable law to the case in question, and had given adequate reasons for its decision rejecting the administrative action as unfounded.

That decision was unanimously adopted by Panel No. 6 and is final. Further reasons for the decision will be set out in the written version thereof.

The cassation complaint was decided by Panel No. 6 of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, composed of: JUDr. Viola Takáčová, PhD., President of the Panel; JUDr. Michal Matulník, PhD., Judge; JUDr. Martin Tiso (Judge-rapporteur).