Belgien vs.

Scientology
Die gesammmelten Blogs
von Jonny Jacobsen

1. Scientology denounces Belgian fraud trial

Scientology has come out fighting days ahead of its trial in

Belgium on charges of fraud and extortion, denouncing what it
says has been years of judicial harassment
Scientology has denounced what it says is years of judicial harassment against it in Belgium,
just days ahead of its trial there on charges of fraud, extortion and criminal association.
The Church of Scientology in Belgium said in a statement that the case amounted to religious
discrimination and vowed to fight it every step of the way.
Two Scientology organisations and at least 11 senior members go on trial in Brussels on
Monday, when Belgian prosecutors will accuse Scientology of being a criminal organisation.
If convicted, that could lead to the Church of Scientology in Belgium being shut down.
A statement Friday from the Belgian Church of Scientology said: Not only does the Church
deny the charges alleged against it which affect the most basic rights of all Scientologists
but it intends to denounce the serious abuses that have marked these 18 years of judicial
harassment.
The trial, at Brussels' Palais de Justice, arises from two separate cases that were eventually
merged. But it has only come to trial after a legal battle lasting 18 years.
The first affair dates back to 1997, when the authorities opened an investigation into possible
fraud and breach of trust after former members filed complaints against the movement.
Police raided Scientology offices in Brussels on September 30, 1999, as French officers
carried out a similar operation in Paris at the request of the Belgian authorities.
In 2007, prosecutors brought charges against several individuals and two Scientology
organisations: the Church of Scientology in Belgium and its European Office for Public
Affairs and Human Rights. Both are registered as non-profit associations.
But the case got tied up in procedural wrangling at Belgium's Chambre de Conseil, which
decides whether or not there is enough evidence to bring the case to court.

The second investigation was launched after Actiris, the Brussels regional employment office,
filed a complaint in 2008 alleging that Scientology had used fake job ads to try to recruit
members.
On April 11, 2008, police raided Scientology's Brussels offices in Uccle, a suburb of the
Belgian capital, seizing hundreds of documents.
The charges going to trial include allegations of fraud; extortion; criminal organisation;
forgery and the use of false documents; violation of privacy; and the illegal practice of
medicine.
This last charge concerns Scientology's Purification Rundown, a cure it administers, which
some medical professionals have criticised as potentially dangerous.
The programme, devised by Scientology's founder L. Ron Hubbard, combines aerobic
exercise and long sessions in a sauna with the consumption of high doses of minerals and
vitamins.

Trial is "incomprehensible and unacceptable": Scientology

Over the years, Scientology's lawyers have filed a series of legal challenges to the way the
investigation has been conducted.
In 2007, the Church of Scientology in Belgium argued in court that prosecutors' public
statements on the affair had not respected the presumption of innocence, prejudicing any
future trial. When the Belgian courts rejected their arguments in 2008, they went to the
European Court of Human Rights.
In September 2013, the Strasbourg court ruled that their bid was premature because they
could not say their trial had been prejudiced before the event. A court statement also said that
Scientology had relied too heavily on press reports of prosecutors' statements, adding: ...it
was highly possible that those articles did not accurately reflect the nuances of the remarks in
question.
Scientology tried to stop the prosecution on a variety of procedural grounds. But on December
10, 2014, Belgium's top court, the Cour de Cassation, rejected their arguments, clearing the
way for a trial.
In a statement Friday, Scientology spokesman Eric Roux said it was incomprehensible and
unacceptable that Belgium's Scientology community was being subjected to such
discriminatory treatment when they only aspire to one thing: to practise their faith freely and
peacefully.
Scientologists have no doubt that the court will do its job with integrity and foresight so that,
just as in Italy or in Spain, where we have been the target of the same campaign of
accusations that proved to be false, their good faith is recognised as the lies told about them
disappear in the light of the truth.
Scientologists in Belgium form a community of honest citizens, workers, contributing to
Belgian society, and want to see their right to freedom of conscience and religion and nondiscrimination respected, he added.

The trial is scheduled to run over 13 court dates up to November 27, before judges at the
69th chambre du tribunal correctionnel de Bruxelles.
If either of the Scientology organisations is found guilty, it would be first time the movement
had been convicted in Belgium.
In 2009, a Paris court fined two Scientology organisations hundreds of thousands of euros for
organised fraud.
France's highest court confirmed the convictions in 2013 and in 2014 the European Court of
Human Rights rejected a bid by Scientology to challenge them there.
Photo of Brussels' Palais de Justice by Jonny Jacobsen

2. Trial Day One: Money & ethics

Day one of the Belgian trial of Scientology opened with the

focus on the movements disciplinary code and how it makes
its money.
The trial of two Scientology associations and 12 members opened Monday in a packed
Brussels courtroom, with the focus on how the movement disciplined its members and how it
made its money.
There was standing room only as the press came out in force to hear details of the charges
against the defendants, which range from fraud and extortion to criminal association.
A former treasurer of the Church of Scientology in Belgium, Anne-France H.*, was the first
of the accused to take the stand.
Anne-France, now 47, explained how she became a Scientologist as a teenager after getting to
know members and being impressed how they applied their beliefs in the way they looked
after their children. Her own family situation had not been good so she had left home early,
she explained.

She had put aside her studies in biology and pharmacy to devote herself to working for
Scientology, She had always been part of a group, she said, ...and I realised that what they
did was quite good.
Yves Rgimont, president of the three-strong tribunal judging the case, asked her about
Scientologys internal laws.
One thing that had struck him, he said, was that the movements founder had devised a
complex system of rules listing a plethora of infractions and their corresponding sanctions.
What had struck him, he said, was how people could be punished simply for arriving a few
minutes late for a course, he said.
Mr. Hubbard seems to have foreseen everything, he said, referring to the movements
founder, who died in 1986. You have a criminal code for things, with infractions and
sanctions.
He noted too that Scientologists were in the habit of denouncing each other for infractions.
Personally, I havent had that experience, the defendant replied. But it was a bit like what
happened at school, she added. It is a question of respect. If you arrived late, that posed a
problem for your twin, your study partner, she explained.
Judge Rgimont also asked about the personality test known as the Oxford Capacity Analysis
(OCA), a list of 200 questions that are often presented to potential members.
Some of these questions are extremely personal, extremely private, he noted.
The answers to the questions are fed into a programme which provides an analysis of your
personality. You can agree or not, said Anne-France. You can say I dont agree and it
stops there.
But so far as she was concerned, she added: If I hadnt found Scientology, I perhaps
wouldnt be here today. What other people had found in the Catholic Church, she had found
in Scientology, she said.
Scientology auditing, the movements system of therapy, had helped her a lot, she said. It
was like talking to a priest or a friend.
I liked the atmosphere of the church, she explained. She found it convivial. So she started to
help out more until finally she signed up for two and a half years on staff. I knew it was
volunteer work from the start, she added.
But she had left the church in 2005 for health reasons but remained friends with her former
Scientology colleagues and still believed that Scientology did a lot of good.
Judge Rgimont returned to her time as treasurer. She explained that there were two separate
accounts: for sales of books and other goods and another for the sale of services. And they
were bringing in 5,000 euros a week, she said, 30 percent of which went on commission paid
for sales.

She denied there was any obligation on the part of staff members to reinvest that commission
back in to Scientology.
She gave a detailed breakdown of where the money went but Judge Rgimont seemed more
interested in the order of seniority within the network of Scientology organisations: from
Brussels, to the European headquarters at Copenhagen, to the centre at Saint Hill, East
Grinstead in England; to Scientologys Los Angeles offices.
And how much had she spent on Scientology, he asked. About 10,000 Belgian francs (250
euros) she said.
Consulting the dossier, the judge reminded her about her membership of the International
Association of Scientologists (IAS) for which she had paid between 30 and 35,000 Belgian
francs. She had also been co-signatory with her husband for a loan for 400,000 Belgian francs
(9,900 euros) for his Scientology training.
The IAS seemed to be receiving colossal sums, he noted. Anne-France said she didnt know
anything about the international situation.
Potential Trouble Source
Prosecutor Christophe Caliman picked up the questioning, asking about an ethics report
written up on a Scientologist who could not pay his course. What interests me is what
happens to you when you cannot pay your debts, said Caliman.
She could not help with this particular case. It was a long time ago, she said. She could not
help him either, with an explanation of what PTS handling (Potential Trouble Source) was.
Another defendant, Stphane J., a former president of the Church of Scientology in Belgium,
was called on to explain.
PTS handling he explained, ... is a course to find out what the sources of problems are and
what you can do about it..
So a PTS was someone who presented a danger to himself, but mostly for the Church of
Scientology? asked Judge Rgimont. Someone who was PTS brought trouble not just to
themselves but also to others, their family, their friends, Stphane explained.
Now we are getting to the core of it, said Judge Rgimont.

Can you imagine a situation in which the Church of

Scientology requires someone to choose between the Church
of Scientology or their family? the judge asked.
Is the person considered as PTS if they do everything to dissuade someone from staying in
Scientology? he asked. Stphane clarified. No, it was the Scientologist who was connected to
such a person who was PTS.
(Here is an explanation from a Scientology website: Potential Trouble Source: (abbreviated
PTS). A person who is in some way connected to and being adversely affected by a

suppressive person. He is called a potential trouble source because he can be a lot of trouble
to himself and to others.
So the PTS person has to follow a course to face up to this threat? asked the judge.
No, said Stphane. The first thing you do is help that person resolve the situation with the
help of an ethics officer.
This is too complicated for me, Judge Rgimont remarked. I dont have a Scientology
interpreter.
He tried again: suppose you have a husband who is outraged at the Scientology courses his
wife is doing. Madame is PTS. What do you do? Do you have to get rid of your husband?
She will try to change his attitude, said Stphane.
You see? Im making progress! said the judge.
She wants to continue in Scientology; he wants her to leave the Church of Scientology,
Stphane continued.
So she needs to choose between her family and Scientology, Judge Rgimont continued. Is
this a choice she made herself of is it something her auditor presented to her? If the
handling was not resolving the situation, did the auditor present the woman with the choice
of either leaving the Church of Scientology or her family?
Can you imagine a situation in which the Church of Scientology requires someone to choose
between the Church of Scientology or their family? the judge asked.
It is Madame who decides, said Stphane.
But that was part of Hubbards arsenal, said the judge. Yes, said Stphane: but this was an
extreme scenario. I have never advised someone to leave their family. We try to do
everything to resolve the situation.

I did my job in good faith

The prosecutor Caliman resumed his questioning of Anne-France H.
What were the consequences of non-payment for Scientology courses? he asked. What did it
mean to be put in a condition of emergency in Scientology, he wanted to know. Is this not
what happens when rules are not followed?
Yes, she replied, but that had no consequence.
Judge Rgimont reminded her that she was accused of being a member of a criminal
organisation. How did she feel about that?
She laughed, She had taken the job as treasurer because there was no else available who could
do it. So far as criminal association was concerned, There was no intention to cheat anyone
at all.

But supposing, said the judge, that the court considers that in some way the global
organisation is not too Catholic -- he rephrased, -- not too correct. Is your position was that
I was just a pawn, I was just doing my job?
I did my job in good faith, said Anne-France. As an active member, my aim was to help
people.
And did she have a superior? Apart from Mr. Hubbard.
We have an Org chart where everyone has their role, she said.
Someone said during the investigation that there was no hierarchy, said the judge. That
everyone followed the rules set down by Hubbard. Some people said there were no leaders.
Because the rules were those of Mr. Hubbard, she said. But people supervised what was
done.
Judge Rgimont had the clerk make a note: Madame confirms that she was subordinate to
certain people-- but there was an objection from the defence, so he rephrased. She was
under the supervision of certain people.
Court adjourned for lunch.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only fair to respect that convention.
Photo, Jean Housen, Galeries de faade du palais de Justice de Bruxelles. Wikimedia CC
Licence.

3. Scientology's 'Gentle Ethics'

A former president of Scientology in Belgium defended its

conception of ethics at the trial of the Church in Brussels.

Day One: Judge Rgimont and a former president of Scientology in Belgium could not agree
on what role the movements system of ethics played in the organisation.
With the start of Monday afternoons session, a former president of the Church of
Scientology, was called to the stand.
Vincent G., 48, dressed in a light-grey suit struck a more confident figure than his predecessor
at the stand. In his replies to the Judge Rgimont, he was courteous to a fault: but he stuck to
his vision of Scientology despite persistent and pointed questioning from the bench.
Vincent G. denies membership of a criminal association and all the other charges against him.
He started by explaining how he had become involved in Scientology as a young man, when
he was studying chemistry and microbiology back in 1990.
I had a friend with whom I didnt always get on, he explained. One day he came along and
something had changed [about him]: he explained that he had met some people who had given
him communications courses.
The next day, I went to the Church of Scientology and took some courses, and I found a
group, a true group, and I really liked that. Fairly quickly, he said, he committed to being a
staff member.
So were the courses you took charged for? asked the judge
A few thousand Belgian francs, replied Vincent.
And that didnt bother you?
He explained that for years he had studied similar subjects at school and college: he had much
preferred what he had learned in Scientology courses such Overcoming the Ups and Downs in
Life. The fact that I was asked to make a contribution did not seem to me to matter.
He worked as a course supervisor: He is there to make sure the student can advance, -- and
trained as an auditor, the person who conducts Scientologys style of counselling.
And was he still active in Scientology? Judge Rgimont asked. Absolutely, said Vincent, in
Lausanne. And as a staff member you dont have to pay for services?
I understand your question, he said.
He had seen from the court files he had consulted -- and what he had heard that morning -that a great emphasis had been put on the paid services in Scientology. But only recently, as a
minister of Scientology, he had celebrated a wedding in France for nothing.
There is an enormous number of services that are free, said Vincent. Of course, if you are
only looking at the bills, you will only see the paid services.
It was quite possible to study at home and do correspondences, he continued, just as you
could train yourself in Scientology using check-sheets.

So its possible to be a Scientologist without spending any money, said the judge. Quite
possible, Vincent replied. Only the other day he had met an old friend he had not seen in 20
years who had told him he was a Scientologist, but inactive.

"Scientology ... is very badly misunderstood"

Vincent summarised his different roles through Scientology. He had started out working in
the bookshop for a year, before going to the United States for a year. Between 1994-99 he had
left staff to run his own business before rejoining at a more senior level.
At this point he took responsibility for Divisions One and Two of the Churchs activities and
also served as the ethics officer: part of his duties were to ensure that everyone was doing
their job properly. Then in 2000 he took on the role of president of the Church of Scientology
of Brussels, ...and I did everything I could to make things work correctly.
And while he was president of the Church, as required by the legal structure of a non-profit
association (ASBL), he was also its religious leader.
And who did he get his orders from? asked Judge Rgimont.
As a director I received my orders instructions from Hubbard.
The judge almost managed a double-take. Not Hubbard! -- Scientologys founder had, after
all, died in 1986.
There are his writings, Vincent explained. He took a lot of trouble to set out his beliefs in
writing. Hubbard had wanted to ensure that everything had been explained so that services
were delivered in an orthodox manner.
And what did it mean, the judge asked, when he read in the case files about the need for
expansion?
Scientology is a very modern religion, said Vincent. And that is perhaps why it is very
badly understood. So among the ways it got its message across to the public was through the
distributions of leaflets and the sale of books.
Does expansion mean more members and so more money? asked the judge. Yes, Vincent
replied.
And was he getting this message from on high somewhere, the judge asked facetiously. Not
all, Vincent replied: though Scientology did have the notion of God as present in the Eighth
Dynamic.
I assumed the responsibility to ensure that things went well, he added. I didnt receive any
mystical orders from Los Angeles.
You have to get your instructions from orders, said the judge. Or do you just do what you
feel are Hubbards instructions? Did he receive orders from the European centre in Denmark,
for example? No, said Vincent: for him it was simply a question of applying what was written
in the works of Ron Hubbard.

During the time when he wasnt active in Scientology, he had run his own business, he said:
so he knew how to make decisions.
But were there quotas imposed from high, the judge wanted to know. And what would happen
if, for example, people just stopped coming in.
That hasnt happened, thank God, said Vincent. That was a hypothetical situation he had
trouble getting to grips with.
And what about Scientology ethics, the judge wanted to know. One got the impression that for
each thing there was a prescribed way of doing things -- and a prescribed list of sanctions too
for every offence, whether it was being rude or failing to listen to an auditor. And it would all
go in your file.
How does that square with the mission to help people? asked Judge Rgimont.
I would agree if that was the case, if that was what had happened, said Vincent. But, he
added: I have never seen the kind of thing that you speak of in 25 years of being a
Scientologist.

Scientology ethics "...is something very gentle, progressive

and is designed to help people advance to superior levels"
But these were in the case files, from Hubbards policy letters, Judge Rgimont objected. He
might not think that this was part of Scientology, but the complaints that had been filed in this
case by numerous people suggested otherwise.
Vincent stuck to his guns. Ethics is a set of rules to help you know how to live and work in
harmony in a group, he explained. It was all set out in Hubbards writings.
As for the sanctions that the judge had mentioned, they had to be put in context.
It is something very gentle, progressive and is designed to help people advance to superior
levels, he explained. If you take one case out of context you are going to reach the wrong
conclusions. But if you take the ensemble of cases, you get a quite different picture Ethics
is only a tiny fraction of Scientology.
He regretted that he had not been observed, working in his natural habitat, he added. You
can only understand these files if you see them as a whole.
So these hundreds, these thousands of files are just a few bits of the puzzle and we havent
understood the whole story, said Judge Rgimont, with more than a hint of scepticism.
When he looked at the list of offences on the charge sheet, he said, whether or not it was just
part of the puzzle, it was serious.
Vincent tried to explain the different gradients of ethics with an example.
The first time someone was late for a course, the supervisor might just make a point of
looking at his watch; the second time he might make an observation; but the third time he

would have to take him aside and confront him about the problem. And at that point, he said,
you would reach an agreement with that person to be on time.
But was that person going to be expelled? No, he said.
The judge did not appear to be satisfied.
Is it absolutely necessary to put everything into ethics files? he asked. What was the point
of such a file, he wanted to know. Wasnt it a bit like a criminal record, with the penalties
increasing each time, he suggested. And if someone wants to leave, is the file there to say,
Watch out, we have a file on you,?
Not at all, said Vincent. I have an ethics file. It also has positive things, he said: things that
showed him in a good light. There are lots of positive things.
Like the fact that someone denounced another student for having arrived late? the judge
suggested. Sorry to go on about it, but it is revealing, after all. Is the act of denouncing
someone in that way normal?
We dont deal in gossip, said Vincent. If you see something that is not right, your write it
up -- and each report is in duplicate -- and that avoids gossip, as that creates a bad
atmosphere.
In the book Introduction to Scientology Ethics [by the movements founder, Hubbard] there
is a chapter on objecting to an ethics note, and if it is not justified then it is destroyed.
And who decided that, asked the judge. The ethics officer, said Vincent.
Then he is a party [to the dispute] and its judge at the same time!
The system is totally transparent, Vincent insisted. Anyone can check by reading the
books.
And was it not the case that parishioners did not get access to their ethics files and preclear
folders? the judge asked. And could he give a concrete example of the good things to be
found in an ethics file?
Vincent mentioned one occasion when he had taken the time to distribute copies of a
Scientology booklet, The Way to Happiness, That is something positive that would be in my
ethics file, he explained.
So something positive is doing what is expected of you, said the judge. And what other
examples: denouncing someone for being late?
Vincent protested: he had not proposed that as a positive element, like the example he had
given.
But it is in the file, said the judge. I spoke earlier of a criminal record: there are no positive
elements there. They went back on forth on this a few more times, but Judge Rgimont did
not seem satisfied with the defendants attempts to portray the ethics file in a more positive
light.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only fair to respect that convention.
Palais de Justice de Bruxelles, la coupole, by Brischi (Wikimedia Commons, public domain)

4. Pieces of the Scientology Puzzle

Documents used by the prosecution have been taken out of

context and are just a few elements in a much bigger puzzle, a
Scientologist told a Brussels court.
The questioning of Vincent G., a former president of the Church of Scientology in Belgium,
continued. And each time the court tried to focus in on specific elements of the case, he urged
them to put things in context: to look at the bigger picture they were missing.
Judge Yves Rgimont asked him much money had he put into Scientology, he asked. Vincent
said that between 1994-99 -- when he was not on staff and so had had to pay for his courses -he had paid around 15,000 euros in payment for services. And also donations.
But there were also his donations to the International Association of Scientologists (IAS),
which came to substantially more, the judge suggested. Everything is relative, Vincent
replied.
The judge was interested in the IAS and how it connected to the Church of Scientology
Belgium. Vincent explained that it was set up by Hubbard to bring together Scientologists
around the world. Each church of Scientology was independent, he explained: but the IAS
brought a certain cohesion, helped bind them together.
While the Church of Scientology existed to promote the writings and philosophy of its
founder, L. Ron Hubbard, the IAS was there to help society, said Vincent. It did this by
promoting drug awareness campaigns and supporting the work of Scientologys Volunteer
Ministers, who were active in New York, for example, in the aftermath of the 2001 September
11 attacks. The IAS also supported Criminon, a rehabilitation programme for prisoners.

They are connected to Scientology but totally independent of the churches, which apply the
writings of Hubbard.
And when you are a Scientologist, do you have to be a member of the IAS? asked the
judge. Is it automatic? Not necessarily, said Vincent.
But a lot of Scientologists appeared to be members, said the judge: so as well as paying for
their courses and materials, they were paying for IAS membership, which almost made it look
as if they were paying twice over.
Pressed by the judge, Vincent said he had donated something like $40,000 to the IAS over 25
years. (At first he had said euros, but later corrected himself.) But membership was not
compulsory, he repeated.

Why pay all that money when you could spend 25 euros on a
sauna?
Judge Rgimont asked about the Purification Rundown, a programme devised by Hubbard
himself designed to clear the body of toxins: it comprises sessions of running, the
consumption of increasing quantities of vitamins and minerals and periods in a sauna.
And was the Rundown indispensable for a Scientologist? Vincent explained that Scientology
had what was called the Bridge to Total Freedom: the Purification Rundown was one of the
steps on that bridge.
And how much did it cost? Around 2,000 euros, said Vincent.
And why did it involve taking such high levels of vitamins and minerals? The effects are not
insignificant, and people have had problems with this, said Judge Rgimont.
Certainly, some people have said that they felt very good afterwards, he added: but there, you
were moving towards the practice of medicine. (Illegal practice of medicine is one of the
charges the Church of Scientology in Belgium is fighting.)
I have done the programme and I am fine, said Vincent. He described the routine he had
followed: he would start at 1:00 pm with 20 minutes running, then go into the sauna -- which
would be at 60-65 C, he was careful to add -- then shower, before repeating the process until
4:00 pm.
Hubbard wrote that the programme helped you sweat toxins held in your body over long
periods of time, and Vincent cited one example of that he believed he had experienced. He
had re-experienced the sensation of the dental anaesthetic used on him when he was 15, as it
had been sweated out during the Rundown, he said.
Judge Rgimont was sceptical. Having established that Vincent had been 23 years old when
he had done the Rundown, he did not see how anaesthetic absorbed all those years earlier
could have been eliminated during the process.
And then there was the cost: did Vincent not think 2,000 euros was excessive for a few
grammes of vitamins and a few hours in the sauna?

In fact, you had to buy the vitamins separately, said Vincent. But so far as the cost of the
Rundown was concerned, the question of whether it was expensive was entirely subjective, he
added: the programme formed part of his [religious] beliefs.
The vitamins and minerals extra?! exclaimed the judge. Ah!
Judge Rgimont returned to the question of the Personality Test used by Scientology, also
known as the Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA) test. The investigators had talked to people
who had turned up at Scientologys building and the first thing they had been asked to do was
to fill in this questionnaire. He wanted to know more about the role it played inside the
movement.
The test, said Vincent, was a way of showing people how they might improve But newcomers
could just as easily start off with a book or an introductory film, he added.
So there was the personality test and then the graph with the results came out of a computer;
and then you did a course; and then the Rundown, said the judge. He was still troubled by the
price. Why pay all that money when you could spend 25 euros on a sauna?
Vincent explained that the Rundown was not something you would do as soon as you had
entered Scientology, but after you had done a few courses: perhaps a year or two down the
road. It was part of ones progress through Scientology.
Is it a progressive path? asked the judge. Or is someone taken by the hand?
Vincent resisted any suggestion that people were being pushed into things. What is true is
what is true for you, he said, quoting one of Hubbards dictums. But he added: If you are
the only one who believes it, you could well pass for a madman.
He had had the good fortune to observe at first-hand what Scientology was and the effect he
had, he said. Scientologists are completely alert and self-determined, he said. They were
nothing like the zombies they were sometimes portrayed as.

"No one has ever been forced"

After a pause, Monday afternoons proceedings resumed, and Christophe Caliman for the
prosecution got his turn to put questions, documents to hand. It wasn't long before the
temperature began to rise.
He started by going back to an issue that the judge had already touched on: were the
purchases in Scientology made freely, or were people pushed into it, he wanted to know.
The purchases were made freely, of course, Vincent replied. How could someone contribute
without wanting to? I dont see how.
Caliman began quoting from one of the thousands Scientology documents seized during the
investigation. It appeared to be an internal discussion of how to get someone to buy more
courses, and the terminology was less than ecclesiastical. There was talk of using the results
from the personality test to handle someone and close so that they paid up; of getting
someone routed for regging for the Bridge.

There was mention of someone who was ex-directory, so the instruction was to get them in
and signed up for an auditing package, ...and then you close for the full auditing bridge. He
was not to be allowed to leave until he had got all the credit together for a full loan, the memo
continued.
Caliman quoted a policy letter from Hubbard, the gist of which was that you got someones
money and then you got them to take out a loan for the rest.
Vincent recognised the first document as one he had signed. But it had to be put in context, he
said: he had written it as a wish-list for the weeks to come, the next stage on the Bridge to
Total Freedom for the people mentioned. This document has no other use but to bring it
about that people advance up the Bridge.
It is poorly phrased, he acknowledged: and not in religious language But it was written for
the benefit of parishioners, some of whom were in the courtroom, he said. He had checked
back over the records, he added: none of the people mentioned in that document had bought
anything in the weeks that followed.
Judge Rgimont stepped in. What about the phrase, You have to give him a hard time?
Again, Vincent conceded that it was poorly phrased. Better would have been: You have to
make his mouth water
But that means forcing them, said the judge.
No one has ever been forced, Vincent replied. It is always the choice of the person.
Judge Rgimont did not seem convinced. This looks rather like a list of people who have
reached a certain level and you have to make them pay more. It is not really a question of
the free will of these people.

It is a bit of a religion for the rich

Of course it is the choice of people to do it or not, Vincent insisted. But like any church,
Scientology was confronted with economic imperatives: it had bills to pay.
Now we are getting to it, said the judge. It has to keep coming in.
The Bridge to Total Freedom takes a certain number of stages, said Vincent. Different
religions had different ways of raising money: some required a 10 percent tithe of members
income, for example. Scientologys system of finance was completely different. But it was
still the choice of individuals as to whether or not they did these courses.
Is this not a bit contradictory? Judge Rgimont asked, referring back to their earlier
discussion about how much it cost to practise Scientology. It is a bit of a religion for the
rich, he suggested.
You can do it for free, said Vincent insisted.
That is the theory, the judge replied.

The prosecutor, Caliman, resumed his questioning.

What happens when you want a refund? he asked. Is it looked on favourably or is it a
suppressive act? (Suppressive acts are the most serious offences in Scientologys system of
ethics.)
Neither one nor the other, said Vincent. But I have never had to give a refund.
Judge Rgimont stepped in again. Could one say that the more one pays, the faster one rose in
Scientology? Not necessarily, Vincent replied.
The prosecutor, Caliman, referred to a document in which a Scientology official was
responding to a request for a refund. In the reply, the official said that what he was asking for
was a suppressive act and that if he did not withdraw his request it would be sent upstairs to
AOSH (Advanced Organization Saint Hill).
This looked very much as if the request for a refund was being met with the threat of being
declared suppressive -- an enemy of Scientology -- and expelled, said Caliman. What were the
serious consequences mentioned in the letter?
Vincent said he could not comment as he had not been working there at the time in question.
But in general terms, he added: For the application of the ethics code, personally that does
not seem to me to be correct. There are an ensemble of factors to take into account to help
someone in ethics. In this case, he felt that the ethics guidelines had not been respected.

A head on a pike?
Consulting another document, the prosecutor asked him about a clash he had had with a
colleague, Jacky Vaquette, back in 1999, which was when he was serving as an ethics officer.
Vincent had summoned Vaquette for an ethics interview for having failed to carry out a
designated task. Vaquette, apparently, had made it clear he had no intention of attending.
Caliman wondered if it was not so much the infractions that were the problem but the policies
that created them.
Again, said Vincent, it was a question of perspective. Ethics should be seen as a whole, he
argued. If you take one incident out of context, you only have one piece of the puzzle. As
for Vaquette, he said: It is true we clashed on this, but we get on well now.
Caliman persisted, referring to his documents. Vincent had called a committee of evidence on
Vaquette, a kind of Scientology disciplinary hearing against him. In it, he had required other
Scientologists to write up knowledge reports on the accused -- tell Scientology what they
knew about Vaquette. And anyone who did not do that, the document continued, would be
considered an accomplice and there would be sanctions.
There is a piece of the puzzle, said Caliman. What is the meaning of this general call for
denunciation? Or was it, as Hubbard had once put it, to put a head on a pike? That last
remark provoked rumblings of protest from the defence lawyers.
There was no committee of evidence and Jacky came back to the right path, said Vincent.
Scientology had ways of resolving this kind of disagreement, he added. Jacky had initially

refused to follow this system, ...and then he decided this was not a game worth playing and
he came back on the path.
But in reading out that document, said Vincent, the prosecutor had chosen instead to stress the
most negative aspects of the affair.
Judge Rgimont stepped in again: You keep giving a different presentation of what is
written. That is not something that we meant to say. Perhaps then, people should take more
care with what they were writing. The meaning of these documents seemed fairly clear to the
investigators, he added. Or are you going to keep saying, That is not what we mean?
Jacky refused to do something, said Vincent. Ethics was applied to the point at which
things returned to normal."

Were speaking French here ... not Scientologese.

Caliman resumed his questioning: had he joined staff freely?
I always do something of my own will, Vincent. Then, perhaps rattled by the prosecutions
portrayal of Scientology ethics, he offered a personal anecdote to show how it had put him on
the right path. When he was running his own business he had submitted a false tax
declaration. But once he considered the matter in Scientology terms -- once he had applied
ethics on himself -- he had written to the tax office to turn himself in.
But for the judge, that was neither here nor there.
You are not accused of defrauding the tax office, he said. But you are accused of
defrauding a certain number of people.
Vincent had chosen his life in Scientology, said Rgimont. But not everyone chose to stay in
the movement and some appeared to have had great difficulty leaving.
I dont think you can take as an example three or four people out of thousands, said
Vincent.
So they are liars, then? asked the judge.
No, discontented, Vincent replied. You can listen to them but you need also to listen to the
thousands of happy Scientologists.
Caliman, the prosecutor, broke in again. You havent answered my question. Do people join
staff freely? And he referred to another document, in which it appeared as if a Scientologist
was being lined up for recruitment.
The instruction in the document was that she be handled by an ethics officer to join staff.
The woman concerned was in the courtroom, Vincent replied. I cant answer for her. But
referring to the document, he conceded: We could have been more clear.

But Judge Rgimont was losing patience. Were speaking French here, were not speaking
Scientologese. Each time a passage from a document was read out, he was saying it was
poorly phrased, that it wasnt like that, the judge continued. Well, duly noted.
Nevertheless, as was his habit at points during the questioning, he dictated an observation to
the clerk, sitting to his left. In certain documents, he said, the terms are unfortunately phrased
and don't necessarily mean --- what the Monsieur the Prosecutor thinks they do. This last was from Xavier Magne,
something of a legend in the Belgian legal world. The eminence grise was one of the bigger
guns in a heavy-calibre arsenal of defence lawyers.

"We are talking about a church a religion"

Vincent's own lawyer, Matre Pierre Monville, took over the questioning. Did he have any
regrets about his time in Scientology?
I am entirely responsible for my actions, his client replied. I make my decisions and I take
responsibility for them."
So for you, said the judge, the charges of extortion, fraud, the illegal practice of medicine
and violation of privacy are nonsense. I suppose that is your position.
Vincent expressed his concern at the line the prosecutor was taking the case. (Earlier, he had
already expressed shock at the fact that the police, during their investigation of the case, had
seized large numbers of personal information on Scientology members: the PC files that
contained intimate details from their counselling, or auditing, sessions; and the ethics files.)
Each church had its own method of financing itself, he repeated: the Catholic Church had, for
example, amassed considerable wealth.
I think its a fair sum, in any case! Judge Rgimont remarked. But Scientology wasnt doing
so badly, considering its relative youth. He referred to the photos he had seen in the case files,
of grand-looking buildings being opened.
But his point was that the Church of Scientology could only run thanks to contributions from
its members, Vincent continued.
Did he regret anything? No, said Vincent. Nor did he feel he was controlled by Scientology.
His church had its own way of doing things, and that might seem strange; different to other
religions. But there were a lot of similarities too.
Matre Adrien Masset, who is defending Scientologys European Office for Public Affairs and
Human Rights, intervened. The question of church financing has been put to very many
different jurisdictions, with quite clear results. We need to judge a modern church in a
different way than the Catholic Church, he said.
We are talking about a lot money here, said the judge.
Matre Masset did not entirely agree. We are talking about a church that is a religion, and if
you leave that out then you are missing the point.

And with that, the first days proceedings ended.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only fair to respect that convention.
Photo of Brussels court interior courtesy of Jean Housen, Creative Commons licence

5. The IAS: funding Scientology's good

works

The International Association of Scientologists supports

Scientology's good works around the world, a defendant told
the Belgian trial of the Church.
At the beginning of Tuesdays proceedings, three people stepped forward in a bid to become
plaintiffs in the case.
They were two former members of Scientology, John Duignan and Samantha Domingo; and
Victoria Britton, from the United States, who explained that she had lost her son in tragic
circumstances. All three felt they had information that would be useful to the court.
Judge Yves Rgimont, after having established that none of them had been personally
affected by the Church of Scientology in Belgium or any of the individual defendants, said he
was obliged to refuse them. While their information might have been pertinent during the
investigation, the stories they had to tell did not fit the framework of the current trial, he
explained.
There was no word, meanwhile, of another man who had turned up a day earlier at the start of
the trial to register as a plaintiff: he had been advised to find a lawyer.
For the moment then, there are no plaintiffs attached to the case. What appears to have once
been a long list has dwindled to nothing after they either settled their grievances with
Scientology or withdrew of their own accord.

But that does not mean that the prosecutors have to discard the stories they told investigators.
They still form part of the case files, and as the judge confronted the defendants with those
events that concerned them, the court got glimpses of those stories.
The third of the defendants, Hilde N.*, was called to the stand, one of two defendants
following proceedings via the simultaneous translation of Flemish interpreters. With other
interpreters assisting two defendants with English translations, the proceedings were
accompanied by a steady background whisper in the different languages.
Judge Rgimont started by asking the defendant to explain how she had got involved in
Scientology.
I worked in a computer company and they sent us to follow courses and that is when I got to
know a Scientologist, she explained. The woman had been a member a long time and they
became friends.
I admired her attitude to life; the way she faced up to things in life, she said. She herself had
been raised a Catholic, but it was not always easy to respect their rules, she said: translating
Catholic values to modern life was no easy task.
I read several [Scientology] books on how to lead a happy life and that interested me
enormously, so she took me to a conference at the Church, she continued. And there, I
found an approach that suited me better than my Catholic upbringing.
So I signed up for two basic courses: Overcoming Ups and Downs in Life and How to Raise
Your Integrity, she said. These basic courses gave her what she needed to decide whether or
not Scientology was for her.
She decided it was: because while she was young, had a good job and plenty of friends, she
still felt that there was something richer in life, something deeper, that she was missing.
And when was this, the judge asked: 1993. And had she been audited? Yes, she had. And
while you were doing the auditing courses, were you advised to go further? No, said Hilde, it
was me who decided to go further.
Scientology contains an enormous amount of things, but Mr. Hubbard, in his Bridge to Total
Freedom, said that you should take little steps if you really want to advance in this spiritual
voyage.

Once you have reached a level of superior awareness, you

start to take care of things that happen in the world around
you.
It wasnt until 1999 that she signed up on staff for four years because they had urgent need of
a Flemish speaker.
Four years? asked the judge. Not two-and-a-half or five, which he had understood to be the
standard terms? That was true, she said: but towards the end of her contract she had had to
withdraw because of health problems.

While on staff, she said, she was out at a lot of book fairs and conferences, informing people
about Scientology. She and her colleagues had also organised a big Scientology exhibition
where they got to show the Churchs activities.
And in the Church itself I was on reception and did guided tours and I took care of
organising Sunday services and monthly festivals, because in Scientology, there are quite a lot
of those. And that is what I did in the first year.
Then at some point, the president and director of the church, Vincent G. resigned. His
designated replacement was not yet trained up for the job, so she stepped in as president and
director of the Church of Scientology Belgium, for what was meant to be an interim period.
My intention was only to be there for a few months, but in the end I was there for a year,
she said. But because of the workload she already had, she was supported by three assistants
who helped and advised her. After that year, she stepped down to a lesser role.
Having left staff, from around about late 2003 she became active member, attending festivals
and every two years going to the centre at Copenhagen or over to Los Angeles for advanced
courses.
And how much had she spent on Scientology over the years? the judge asked. Around 40,000
euros, which over a period of 20 years came to around 2,000 a year, said Hilde. And in the
years she was on staff she had received courses and auditing for free.
And did that sum include the International Association of Scientologists (IAS) payments? No,
she said: the sum she had mentioned was what she had paid for religious services, auditing
and Scientology materials such as Hubbards writings.
Judge Rgimont wanted to know more about the IAS. Hilde explained it was an organisation
of members dedicated to raising money to help the Church pursue its religious programmes.
Once you have reached a level of superior awareness, you start to take care of things that
happen in the world around you, she explained.
The IAS was a non-profit, and the money it received was used to sponsor socially useful
programmes: anti-drug campaigns, supporting human rights and action to combat illiteracy.

What is important for me is to be able to contribute to the

humanitarian works that the IAS does.
And how much did you invest in the IAS? the judge asked. Around 25,000 euros over 20
years, Hilde replied.
But that was back in 1993, when she was already listed as a Patron of the IAS in Church
publications, said the judge. And you get to be a Patron of the IAS from which point? he
asked.
There were different levels of membership, she said: you could be a member for free for six
months; and you could be a Life Patron for $20,000.

But she had paid $5,000 more than that, the judge noted. And that was only up to 1999. At
that time, she said, she and Vincent G. were together, so they were listed as a couple. but they
later separated.
So you are no longer a Patron? asked the judge. That struck Judge Rgimont as a little
unfair. You should make a claim about that, he suggested.
Hilde demurred. What is important for me is to be able to contribute to the humanitarian
works that the IAS does.
The judge wanted to know whether Hilde had held the posts of director of the Church of
Scientology Belgium and religious director in the Scientology Org chart. The first post is one
of the legal requirements for running a non-profit in Belgium (Association Sans But Lucratif,
ASBL); the second is one of the positions set out in the administrative structure devised by
Hubbard, which all churches are required to follow.
Hilde replied that it was often the case that one person held both posts and she had too: on top
of that, she had also been responsible for public relations. Her exceptional workload was one
of the reasons she had three people helping her with her duties.
So when she was director, how did that work? The day before, Vincent G. had said that when
he was in the post of president he had simply applied the writings of the founder, L. Ron
Hubbard: he had not, he said, been receiving mystical orders from Los Angeles.
Hilde explained that at the time they had been a very small team ...and not everyone was
always there. But I had a lot of people helping me.
The decisions you took, did you take them alone, or not? the judge asked.
All the decisions I took were always taken in consultation with my colleagues, she replied.
Who, precisely?
That depended on what was being decided, said Hilde. If it was a little decision -- who took
care of reception, or cleaned the hallway -- that was a decision taken by a few people. And for
more important decisions, such as paying the bills, there were my three advisors.
Then Judge Vrimont turned to the heart of the case as it concerned her.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.
Photo of the Palais de Justice Interior, Brussels, Lawrence F White, CC Licence.

6. Questions of Privacy

Day Two of the Belgian trial of Scientology: the judge

questioned one defendant closely about the highly personal
information investigators had found in members files.
Having listened to the defendant Hilde N.* outline her progress through Scientology during
her 22 years with the Church, Judge Vrimont turned to the heart of the case, as it concerned
her. She was accused of violating the rules regarding Belgiums privacy laws. Did she have
anything she wanted to say to that?
There was no data gathered or recorded, said Hilde.
Quand mme! the judge exclaimed: clearly he did not agree. There were the Preclear (PC),
files, the Life Histories and investigators had also found sensitive information in computer
files, he said.
Preclear files contain the notes taken by Scientologys auditors, or counsellors, during their
auditing sessions with other Scientologists. Their contents often contain the kind of deeply
personal information one might find in a therapists notes (or, to use an analogy that
Scientologists would doubtless prefer, the kind of thing a Catholic priest might hear during
confession). Life histories can also contain the intimate details of a Scientologists private life.
Hilde explained that she was not an auditor the kind of Scientologist who dealt with such
files but she had read the writings of Mr. Hubbard about how to arrive at a higher religious
awareness.
But the judge was more concerned with whether Belgium's privacy laws had been breached.
So if Mr. Hubbard says in one of his books that things should be done in one way, then
never mind what the law in a particular country says, is that it?
I think the Church way is that everything is done respecting the law, she replied.
The judge reminded her that investigators had seized masses of documents during their
searches of the Scientology offices and found private information on Scientologists both in
the physical documents and in computer files. So for you everything was in accordance with
Belgian law?

She mentioned another defendant, Myriam Z., saying that she had worked with specialist
lawyers at the time to ensure that everything was in order. For my part, she added, I have
full confidence that everything was done according to the rules and I should say that the
Preclear files are written down and there is only one computer for mailings.
Preclear files, she explained, were for the auditing notes: the things people had confided
during the sessions. I myself have never been an auditor but I have often been audited. She
could assure the judge that these people were professionals. She was quite comfortable
confiding her intimate secrets to them and she had full confidence in the support the auditor
provided.
It was nevertheless astonishing, said Judge Rgimont, that the Church of Scientology seemed,
in 1999-2000 to be completely ignorant of privacy laws passed back in 1992.
And what she was saying now was not quite what she had told investigators back in
November 2002, he added. Back then she had said that, so far as the collection of legal,
medical and sexual information on members was concerned, it had never been the aim to
gather them for the Church. So that rather suggested that data was indeed being collected.
Hilde suggested that Myriam Z. might be better able to explain the system that had been put
in place. But in any case, she wasnt sure she saw the problem: given the nature of auditing
after all, everyone knew what was in their file.
In auditing, as she had experienced it, she explained, ...if there is a good contact between the
auditor and the person being audited, I can tell details of my private life, sexual life and my
concept of life and the auditor can know it but I know what he knows because it was me
myself who told him and it was with the aim of advancing spiritually.
Obviously then, she knew the contents of her PC folder because it was what she had told her
auditor, she said. But, she added: I only told him what I wanted to tell him.
What you want to tell or what he wants you to, to reach a spiritual level? asked the judge.
When you start in Scientology, they tell you in advance how things are done, the how and
the why of things, she replied. And I know that when I start an auditing session the auditor
will put a number of questions and it is for me to answer or not answer.
When the auditor puts these questions, it is most of all to help you understand yourself better
and to help you find your own answers. Scientology is there to help people and you can
always help people. You can give someone who is hungry a fish, or you can teach them to
fish, she added.
Thats Catholicism! said the judge, to laughter.

Im not sure about that because the court has to look at

your credibility, said the judge.
Did Scientologists use consent forms? he asked. Without doubt yes, replied Hilde and in
case of need there was a witness. And nobody was forced to go further than they wanted to. I

also have friends who have shown some interest, but have said they didnt want to be audited
and so they have done a book or a course, she added.
Then Judge Rgimont got down to specifics. Did she know of the BZ family? This would
have been between 2000 and 2003, he said. She said she did remember them and recalled they
had been Scientologists for years.
One of the familys children, it seemed had wanted to take the Personality Test at a time when
she was minor. Hilde it seemed, had had her sit the test: but since the girl concerned was still
a child, by law, this required the prior consent of the parents.
Hilde said she had no memory of the incident with the Personality Test, but if a minor had
taken the Personality Test then it would have been with the consent of the parents.
She also wanted to add that the family concerned were French-speakers, while she herself was
a Flemish-speaker, which meant she would not have been dealing with them. So it was not
me. It was another Hilde.
And the person who had shown the girl one of the introductory films at the centre, the judge
asked: that wasnt her either? At the time, she said, she did not speak enough French to be
able to deal with a French-speaking family, she said. She named another colleague who would
have taken care of them.
The father and the mother and the brother did courses with us, she recalled. In the
meantime, the youngest, a girl, was getting bored. I remember she helped us put mailings in
an envelope and then she asked to see a film, because she was bored.
That is not what you said at the time, said Judge Rgimont. Years earlier, when she had
been questioned by investigators, she had given a more detailed explanation of how one of the
sons had seen a film on Dianetics, become interested and come to her to ask about details; and
that she had started him on it after getting the consent of his parents.
Now, for someone who didnt speak French, that is a fairly detailed statement, the judge
remarked.
What the judge had to bear in mind, she said, was that between Scientologists a lot of the
communication was done in English. But in any case, she said, the incidents in question dated
back more than 13 years, so she could not remember in which language she had spoken to
them, English or French.
Im not sure about that because the court has to look at your credibility, said the judge.
The declaration dates to 2006, said Hilde. The events date to even further back. I saw these
people at the Church and I perhaps spoke to these people but I certainly didnt actively take
care of these people.
So the facts alleged against her as the prosecution had laid them out: so far as she had
concerned, this was pure fantasy, nothing to do with what happened?

Monsieur Le Prsident, as a good citizen and a good Scientologist, if I committed a fault I

want to assume my criminal responsibility. But in my soul and in all good conscience, as a
Scientologist I have always tried to be a good person and I will continue to do so.
Scientology has been enriching for me. I have become a better and more complete person:
and the only thing I wanted to do was to transmit that to other people.
After a 10-minute break, it was the turn of the prosecutor, Christophe Caliman to put his
questions.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.
Image credit: Palais De Justice, Brussels via free images(license)

7. "Unfair! Unfair!"

Day Two of the Belgian Scientology trial. Defence lawyers

clashed with the prosecutor as he read from Scientology policy
letters relating to its disciplinary system
There were two state prosecutors at the trial of Scientology: Christophe Caliman, who had
followed the investigation for more than a decade; and Jean-Pascal Thoreau, who as well as
handling high-profile cases in also acts a media spokesman for the federal prosecutors office.
So far, Caliman had taken the lead and he did so again with defendant Hilde N.*
Investigators had established that Hilde, as a Field Staff Member (FSM), had been receiving a
15-percent commission for the courses and materials that she had sold. Caliman asked her
about the difference between a staff member and a Field Staff Member.
Not every Scientologist could make the commitment to be a staff member, as she had for a
few years, said Hilde. But if you did want to spread the word about Scientology, you could
sell Hubbards books and other materials to friends and family. Mr. Ron Hubbard developed
a system to reward people like that.

Once she had completed her commitments as a member of staff, she became a Field Staff
Member, as anyone who wants to be can be, she said.
In fact, when she herself had first got into Scientology, it had been via a Field Staff Member:
the woman she had mentioned earlier in her testimony, the one she had met on the training
course. It was she who had sold her her first books and training courses, she said.
Over the years, this woman had accompanied her during her progress in Scientology because
that was also their role: it was a kind of buddy system, in which the more experienced
Scientologist gave her protg the benefit of her experience.
Earlier, said Caliman, she had spoken of consent forms. Why were they required? Hilde said
she did not understand the question, so the prosecutor tried again.
Why does the Church of Scientology seek the consent of persons and in what context? he
asked. Judge Rgimont stepped in: this was a reference to the consent forms that members
signed relating to the data gathered during auditing sessions. Why do you sign consent
forms?
I have to think, she replied. Its been a long time. Most of all, she said, it was to inform
people. She mentioned her fellow defendant, Myriam Z, again. Her introduction of consent
forms was one of the changes she had made to bring the situation into conformity with the
law, acting on the advice of a team of lawyers
We made sure that before people received religious courses, they had to know what they
were getting and what their rights were, and it is normal that people know this, she said.
The prosecutor continued: the defendant had said that people came to be helped, and that she
herself had been helped; that everything was done on a voluntary basis and that one could
accept or refuse auditing, as one wished. Does Madame confirm this?
It was a question of context, said Hilde. Auditing was for the benefit of the person being
audited; it was not about collecting data, she said. So if she was being audited, it was not
about the auditor wanting to learn things about her; it was her wanting to have a chance of
seeing things in a different way.
But the prosecutor was not satisfied. My question is not to know the aims of auditing, but if a
person can refuse it. Yes or no?
Her response was still not to the point, so the judge stepped in again. The auditor Excuse
me, he said, correcting himself the prosecutor was asking a fairly clear question. Can a
person in auditing say I am not answering that question. Yes or no? I think the question is
clear so I think the answer should be.
Yes, said Hilde. A person can say No, I am not answering that question.
Without being punished? asked the prosecutor.
That I dont know, she answered: she was not qualified in that area.

Dloyale! a defence lawyer protested.

The prosecutor Caliman, referring to a document, quoted a Hubbard Communications Office

Policy Letter (HCOPL), one of those that Scientologys founder Hubbard had written setting
out punishments for offences committed within the Church.
Listed as a minor offence was refusal to tell your overts (things you had done wrong). And
anyone who refused to confess, Hubbard had written, should be put in the hands of an ethics
officer. In Scientology, ethics officers ensure that Hubbards rules are followed.
Caliman read out a series of numbers, the box and file references for this particular document,
but there was consternation among the defence lawyers. There were mutterings of
Dloyale! (unfair) and more than one lawyer stepped forward, in a bid to address the court.
One lawyer protested that this document, from the prosecutors vast stock of paperwork, had
nothing to do with this particular defendant. His point seemed to be that two separate criminal
investigations had been merged into the single trial: but this document appeared to be from
the part that did not concern Hilde N.
Matre Pierre Monville stood up to express what a number of his colleagues on the defence
side seemed to think. The lawyers in the Cause Two are not concerned by the elements of
Cause One, he said.
This was dloyale, unfair, on the part of the prosecutor, he added, and he was giving fair
warning that it was dlicat tricky to rely on documents from one side of the case to
prosecute the other. Neither the defence lawyers concerned, nor indeed their clients, had had
sight of them. And if he raises this in his closing argument, it is a problem.
Judge Rgimont intervened. He thought that the prosecutor had referred to this in another
document that concerned Me. Monvilles case papers. He nevertheless noted the objection,
without ruling one way or another. But it was clear to him, he added, that a defendant could
not answer to something in the part of the case that did not concern them.
Judge Rgimont dictated one of his regular memos to the court clerk to the effect that the
defence formally objected to the document being attached to the file. It is not as if he came to
court with a document that is not known, he added. But the defence position was that this
document had no standing in this context. I understand your reaction, he told the defence
lawyers. The defendant, Hilde N., could not be pulled into the other half of the case.
The defence had just fired a shot across bow of the prosecutor, warning him that they would
attack him on procedural grounds if he tried to use this document against this client. Caliman
was unrepentant. He had produced the text for the convenience of everyone, he said, waving it
at them.
Dloyale! protested a defence lawyer.
He may only have quoted extracts of these documents, he said, but these texts existed and
many of them appeared in Hubbards book Introduction to Scientology Ethics. The text was
among the documents seized by investigators and had been entered into the record: And this
is what Scientologists spend their lives studying, he added.
There were several more minutes of back and forth with that, as Me. Monville, for the
defence, suggested, with the greatest possible respect of course, that Monsieur Le Procureur

was trying to pull a fast one. It was not acceptable for the prosecutor to cherry-pick passages
from Hubbards writings (in what was already a massive file) and try to impose his
interpretation of what had been written.

My aim is not to ambush the defence, said the prosecutor.

This was an issue that affected all the defendants, he warned: the prosecution should take
heed of their formal objection. And if he was going to quote any more such passages, the
defence should be given the full references in advance.
Caliman raised his hands, almost as if to show he had nothing up the sleeves of his legal
robes: I have no problem with that, he said. My aim is not to ambush the defence.
Im sure the defence will be putting its side, said Judge Rgimont. But again, he took note
of the objections.
The message was clear on both sides: the prosecution would be making full use of the
Hubbard letters that Hubbard had written and which had been seized during the police raids of
Scientology offices. For him and his colleague Thoreau, these documents told a different story
to the one the defendants had so far advanced.
For its part, the defence would be formally objecting to any attempt to bring documents from
one half of the investigation over to the other as that would prejudice the right of their clients
to a fair trial; and they would challenge any partial interpretation of Hubbards writings
advanced by the prosecution based on selective quotes. Lines were being drawn in the sand.
Caliman resumed his questioning of Hilde N.
This time he referred to the notes from when Hilde N. had been questioned by investigators in
November 2007. She had said then that she knew nothing about disciplinary measures taken
against parishioners during her presidency.
And then he referred to another document from the thousands seized by investigators: in this
one, the defendant had signed an ethics order putting staff in a Condition of Danger because
its stats were down. (Caliman did not explain, but the Condition of Danger is part of the ethics
conditions devised by Hubbard.) There was mention too of Overts and Withholds and a report
to an ethics officer.
Caliman asked: Did these documents not contradict her testimony?
I was not informed of that document and I dont remember it either, she replied. and I want
to add what M. [Vincent] G. said yesterday: we first of all need to put things in context. She
no longer knew what that context was, she said ...and for the rest, I no longer remember.
She was referring to the arguments about context advanced by her fellow defendant Vincent
G. on the first day of the trial.
As he did for any point he thought especially worthy of attention, Judge Rgimont had the
court clerk record the exchange. After a question put by the Prosecutor relating to an ethics
order signed by Hilde N., the defendant no longer remembers what it is about, nor the context.
Not.

She is credible, said her lawyer. What she said then is

what she says now.
Now it was the turn of her lawyer, Matre Johan Scheers.
During the legal arguments earlier, Me. Scheers had been checking his files. He reminded the
court that he had argued during procedural hearings in the Chambre de Conseil that preceded
the trial that certain documents should have been translated from French to Flemish for her
benefit. This latest dispute rather made his point for him, he suggested. But no matter: he had
found the transcript of what she had told investigators and, contrary to what the prosecutor
seemed to be suggesting, it matched what she had said in court.
Even then, she had told investigators that she could no longer remember, said Me. Scheers. So
far as the BZ family was concerned the family that the judge had asked her about earlier
she had seen them perhaps three times. It had been a French-speaking colleague who had
taken care of them, she told investigators: just as she had said in court.
Earlier, the judge had raised the issue of her credibility, and her lawyer was addressing that
question now. She is credible, said Me. Scheers. What she said then is what she says now.
Perhaps the only thing she had added was her suggestion to the judge that she might have
spoke to the family in English rather than French.
He had one question that he would like to put to his client, he said. Judge Rgimont had no
objection, and relayed the question: it was simply to establish that she had not been active on
staff in Scientology in 2003: that she had written two letters of resignation at the end of 2002
asking to step down for health reasons. The defendant confirmed that that was the case.
And just so there was no misunderstanding, added Me. Scheers: did those health problems
have anything to do with Scientologys Purification Rundown? None, she confirmed. The
question was important given that some of the defendants are on trial for the illegal practice of
medicine.
Before she stepped down from the stand, she made a point of thanking her interpreters for
their work.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.
Image credit: Wenn Sich Die Gerechtigkeit So Aufblht, Wohnt Dort Wohl Eher Die Macht
via free images(license)

8. "Who decides?"

Day Two of the Belgian Scientology trial: The judge

questioned one defendant closely about the e-meter, a device
used during Scientology counselling; and on the Churchs
Purification Rundown.
The next defendant to be questioned was Patricia R.*, who explained that she had been a
Scientologist, off and on, since 1997, having worked contracts as an auditor and course
supervisor.
During her time on the stand, Patricia was not particularly forthcoming. It was not that she
was being deliberately unhelpful: more that she seemed to have trouble understanding some
of the questions. Her answers tended to be short, and not always to the point.
Judge Rgimont, referring back to the questions put to the previous defendant on the stand,
asked her if people being audited could say they didnt want to answer an auditors question.
At first the answer seemed to be yes. Then it was less clear.
Would you like me to put the question again? asked the judge. No, she replied.
Auditing is for the person themself to reach fixed objectives, she said. And it goes without
saying that if she does not answer she will not reach those objectives.
So if you did not want to answer you could choose not to?
No, it doesnt work like that. An auditor puts a question and perhaps the PC [preclear; the
person being counselled] is not interested and the PC is not obliged to answer. There were
different kinds of auditing and different kinds of questions you could put, she added.
In response to further questioning, she said that Hubbards book, Dianetics, talked about
auditing. She also said that two people could do auditing by themselves without having to
come into the church.

That struck the judge as strange, given that auditing appeared to be a relatively directed
spiritual programme. Thats how it was sometimes, Patricia answered. She had been a lowlevel auditor until 1996, when she left the Church for a couple of years. When she came back,
she said, she was no longer qualified.
So professional auditors can lose their status, said the judge. Did they not tell you at some
point that it was only for five years? She had not known, she said: but she was not especially
bothered. She didnt do auditing any more.
The judge asked her about the electropsychometer, or e-meter, the device used in Scientology
auditing. He wanted to know how it worked, but she didnt know.
Im not an expert, she said. But I can tell you that an e-meter itself does nothing.
Thats obvious, said the judge. I have a microphone. On its own it does nothing.
But did it react the same way if different people gave the same answer? Was it different every
time, or what? Judge Rgimont wanted to be clearer on how it worked.
Everyone is different, said Patricia. I am someone who reacts easily, so it may react
differently for me.
So, the judge asked: the same question can make the e-meter react differently, depending on
whos answering? Yes, said Patricia.
So then whats the objective value of this device? But the judge was asking the wrong
person.
There are all kinds of reasons the e-meter might react that have nothing to do with the
question [asked], said Patricia.
So when it reacts, its a way for the auditor to say, Ah, there is a problem, the judge
suggested.
The auditor will work with the person to resolve that question, said Patricia. Then, or later,
said the judge.
No, no, no, said Patricia, for the first time animated. You dont want to restimulate, she
added, using a Scientology term for unlocking bad memories.
If someone has an emotion they dont like, they can get rid of it, said Patricia. The e-meter
is a machine that helps you go in the direction you want to. It is just a machine: it is nothing in
itself, she added.

And who says that you have arrived at the state of Clear?
the judge asked.
The qualified people, said Patricia. I dont know about
that. Im not qualified.

The judge said he understood and moved on to discussing the price. Patricia she had bought
one in 1990 for around 100,000 Belgian francs (a little under 2,500 euros). But there were
deluxe models that could cost around 6,000 euros, she said. It was the difference between
buying a standard car and a Porsche, she said.
But the judge was back to thinking about just how the device worked.
The function of an e-meter, I suppose it was set down by Mr. Hubbard, he began. But from
what she had told him, it seemed that the e-meter gave different readings for different people.
So how can Mr. Hubbard in the 1950s, have anticipated the way that one interprets the
movement of a needle today?
Patricia wasnt sure. By auditing people, he must have learned, she said.
But he could only have had a limited sample, the judge objected. Do you have a critical
spirit towards the e-meter? he asked. Id take it with a pinch of salt.
So far as Im concerned, I always applied what Id learned, she insisted.
How, exactly?
It was like life, said Patricia. If it works for me, then it works.
And could one reach a certain spiritual level without auditing?
When she started out, she said, it was possible to reach Clear about halfway up
Scientologys Bridge to Total Freedom with basic Dianetics auditing, she said. (Dianetics
auditing, at least as the original book describes it, does not require the use of an e-meter.)
And who says that you have arrived at the state of Clear? the judge asked.
The qualified people, said Patricia. I dont know about that. Im not qualified.
So if I do 50 sessions with the clerk here, said the judge, indicating the court official sitting
to his left. Who says,
You are an individual person, said Patricia. You can say if you are Clear from the
definition in the book.
So I can be Clear without knowing it, said the judge. Just as I can not be Clear in someone
elses view.
The specialist can say that you are Clear, said Patricia. That can happen.
Bien, said the judge. Fine which was his way of punctuating proceedings. It was time to
move on.
Now Judge Rgimont asked about the Purification Rundown, a Scientology programme that
involves aerobic exercises, sessions in a sauna and the consumption of large quantities of
vitamins and minerals. One of the charges alleged against some of the defendants was illegal
practice of medicine.

Patricia had been one of those who supervised the programme and the judge wanted to know
how it was organised.
She explained how she prepared the sauna and how there was a pharmaciste who prepared the
doses in advance (though as the court had already heard, that was something any Scientologist
doing the Rundown had to pay for on top of the basic cost).
I went to see people when they came out of the sauna to see how they were, said Patricia.
To explain the programme? Yes, said Patricia: when she was there. But the person doing the
Rundown also kept a journal, she added.
And who decided the doses of vitamins? That was determined by the writings of Mr.
Hubbard, she said. She mentioned something about how she had had people who believed in
homeopathy doing the Rundown on significantly reduced doses.

With all due respect to Hubbard, the judge said, he could

not have thought of every individual case.
When the judge asked about the role that doctors played in the procedure, she explained that
they issued medical certificates if they thought their patient could do the Rundown. But Judge
Rgimont established that the doctors had not always read Clear Body, Clear Mind,
Hubbards book on the Rundown.
That suggested to him that some doctors might be clearing patients for the Rundown without
knowing about the large quantities of vitamins and minerals that would be consumed:
quantities that some doctors contacted by investigators had expressed concern about.
Patricia tried to reassure him: she insisted on cardiology and full medical tests, she said. You
couldnt just walk in and do the Purification Rundown.
And there are no checks afterwards? asked the judge. No, said Patricia: that was for the
doctor to do. Though sometimes doctors refused to let someone do the Rundown at all.
So Hubbard determined the doses, said the judge, picking up his earlier thread again.
If you like, said Patricia. Mr. Hubbards book on the subject, Clear Body, Clear Mind,
explained everything.
With all due respect to Hubbard, the judge said a little later, he could not have thought of
every individual case.
The defendant agreed. It was not just done by the numbers: one person could finish the
Rundown in a matter of days on a very low dose, while others would take longer.
And who decides? the judge asked. That depended on the phenomenon, said Patricia, which
appeared to mean what the person doing the Rundown was experiencing and reporting. The
judge was still not satisfied, however: who decided on these phenomena?

You just told me the doses are in the book of Mr. Hubbard, but that the doses depend on the
phenomenon.
Yes, said Patricia.
Who decides what the phenomena are to change the dose? asked the judge. Is it you, the
course supervisor?
She made a couple of false starts at answering, but she was struggling. I dont understand the
question, she said. So the judge tried again.
Who determines the dose, case by case? he asked.
Okay. It is me and Mme C. [her fellow supervisor], she answered. If you had put the
question clearly she added, a little reproachfully.
Judge Rgimont had his clerk record the response. Madame answers that it is she who
determines on a case-by-case basis the quantities of vitamins that should be taken by the
person on the Purification Rundown. The course supervisor made those decisions in
correlation with what Mr. Hubbard had written about the phenomena in his book, he added.
Patricias lawyer, Matre Cedric Vergauwen, asked that two key points in her testimony be
formally entered into the record: that candidates for the Purification Rundown were sent for a
full medical check before doing the programme; and that they were not allowed to take part if
the medical opinion was unfavourable.
But the defence lawyers had other points to raise about the way the judge had been
questioning the defendant.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.
Picture of e-meter by O'Dea at WikiCommons

9. Appropriate Questions

Defence lawyers objected to the judge's questions about the emeter, arguing he should show more respect for what
Scientologists consider a religious artefact.
As Judge Yves Rgimonts questioning of the defendant Patricia R.* drew to a close, Matre
Pascal Vanderveeren stepped forward.
Vanderveeren represents the Church of Scientology in Belgium. He commands a certain
respect among his peers as someone who has served as btonnier, whose job it is to moderate
disputes between his fellow lawyers not to mention his work with the International Criminal
Court. So when he had something to say, the court was more than usually attentive.
We are at the heart of religious practice insofar as these things are concerned and there was
some consternation in court during the discussion, he told the judge. Matre Vanderveeren
appeared to be indicating not just the defendants, but some of the Scientologists in court to
support them seated on the public benches behind him.
The suggestion appeared to be that the judges questioning of Patricia R. regarding the emeter the device used by Scientologists during their counselling, or auditing sessions had
upset some of the Scientologists present. Judge Vrimont had not appeared convinced of the
e-meter's efficacy.
This, he said, was why he had wanted religious experts to be able to come to court to explain
these matters. I am the lawyer of the Church of Scientology, but I have to remind the court
that for now the Church of Scientology is a religion.
This of course was a reminder that the prosecution regarded his clients as a criminal
organisation. The suggestion appeared to be that the judges line of questioning was leaning
too far in that direction and away from consideration of Scientologys status as a religion.
Judge Rgimont stood his ground. Matre Vanderveeren may well be defending the Church,
he said: but the defendants were on trial for a certain number of criminal offences, he said.
But would he have done the same if they had been Catholics, Vanderveeren wondered.
Would you debate the secrets of the confessional?

The judge replied that he thought it perfectly reasonable that he put these questions in a bid to
better understand the case.
But this particular defendant had not been in the Church of Scientology for 10 years, said
Matre Vanderveeren.
Already at the start of the trial the previous day, Matre Vanderveeren had offered to give a
20-minute presentation to explain exactly what the Church of Scientology was.
Judge Rgimont had turned him down, saying he would have all the time he needed to set out
his case. The court does not have to be taken by the hand, he had told him.
Then on Tuesday morning, at the start of proceedings, some of the defence lawyers had raised
another issue with the judge.
He had, they said, been asking some defendants general questions about how Scientology
operated that had little bearing with the charges they personally faced.
Judge Rgimont replied that the defendants had already been questioned during the
investigation about the facts as they concerned them: he had the relevant transcripts.
What he was interested in finding out in court was how the Church of Scientology worked
precisely because the Church in Belgium was itself among the accused.
He could always handle this case la Flamande, he added: simply establishing the
defendants identity and their reaction to the charges before moving to legal arguments. But
personally he preferred to dig deeper, to try to understand.
Now however, Matre Vanderveeren, was offering the judge what he called une mise en garde
sympathique a friendly warning regarding his line of questioning.

The defendants here feel that their religion is on trial...

Judge Rgimont however, was running out of patience. The court is trying to find its way,
he said, clearly irritated. If the defence wanted, of course, he could always switch to the basic
approach: name, plea and legal arguments. I have no problem with that, he added (though
clearly he did).
Matre Vanderveeren gestured apologetically to his colleagues: I am not in this alone, he
replied.
Then the second of the two prosecutors, Jean-Pascal Thoreau stood up. Up until this point, the
court had not heard from Thoreau. His colleague Christophe Caliman, who had followed the
investigation for more than a decade, had put all the questions.
Thoreau however was angry and he did not mince his words.
I am somewhat astonished at your intervention, he told Matre Vanderveeren. The
defendants were being asked perfectly appropriate questions considering the facts of the case
and the offences listed on the charge sheet.

She said she was an auditor and that she handled the Purification Rundown, said Thoreau
of the defendant, Patricia R. So the questions put did not seem to him to be unusual.
For Matre Vanderveeren to stand up and tell the court that they were dealing with a religion
did not, then, strike him as at all helpful, ... and if you want to talk about lack of objectivity

I dont think I asked any questions that were outside the file, said Judge Rgimont,
breaking in on the prosecutors verbal broadside. These questions seem to me to be
legitimate and they seem to be pertinent.
The courts job is to decide this affair, he added. It is our job to decided if the case stands.
If I cannot put questions that are perhaps difficult, then I can stop putting these questions and
I can just take note of the names and ask for their reaction to the charges. That is okay with
me.
But as one defence lawyer pointed out, since the judge had closely questioned three of the
defendants, he could hardly switch to a more cursory examination of the others.
The defence will have plenty of time to correct the line of fire, said the judge. Either you
let me put my questions or not.
Another defence lawyer intervened. Everyone here was of good faith, and wanted the trial to
proceed in a tranquil and transparent manner. But frankly the way the investigation had been
taken over by the prosecutors office
Thoreau tried to intervene again, and again Judge Rgimont headed him off.
Another defence lawyer stood up: he too was only interested in a tranquil and transparent
debate. But frankly, the given the way the prosecutors had gone after the defendants if they
had been Catholics or Muslims it would have been indefensible.
The difference is criminal association, the prosecutor growled.
Once more, Judge Rgimont broke in to try to restore the tranquility and transparency that
everybody insisted they wanted.
Matre Vanderveeren and his colleagues had made their points, he said. But he was not going
to let the reaction of Scientologists in the courtroom determine his line of questioning.
Matre Cedric Vergauwen, Patricia R.s own lawyer, was still not happy. The defendants
here feel that their religion is on trial, he said. So it is understandable that people feel hurt.
He offered by way of example the way the e-meter had been discussed, and the word
drision came up: which means much the same in French as it does in English.
Thoreau, for the prosecution, objected that it was perfectly normal to ask questions about the
e-meter.
Be careful how you put your questions, Matre Vergauwen replied.

"I did not want to do anything illegal"

There were a few more exchanges between the defence lawyers and the prosecution and the
main thing that emerged was that for Scientologists, the e-meter was a religious instrument, a
sacred object: so the defence team was calling for a little respect.
Finally, Judge Rgimont drew a line under the debate, which was threatening to flare up once
more. He was sorry, he said, if his line of questioning had shocked anyone. And with that, he
adjourned the proceedings for lunch.
When the court reconvened in the afternoon, he finished off his questioning of Patricia
R. What did she have to say in response to the charges she herself faced: of fraud, nonrespect of the countrys privacy laws, belonging to a criminal association and criminal
conspiracy?
I am very disturbed by a lot of things that concern me in the file, the defendant replied. I
dont feel Im a crook. Im not a crook. If it turned out that she had done illegal things then
she would have to accept that. But I dont feel Im a crook.
So you acted in good faith? asked the judge.
If it is really illegal then I did it but I did not want to do anything illegal.
Her lawyer, Matre Vergauwen, wanted to know about her departures from Scientology: she
had been in and out of the Church several times.
When Judge Rgimont asked her about that, it emerged that she had several times dropped out
of Scientology for periods since first joining it in the late 1970s: but it had always been her
choice and she had never been put under any pressure to return, she said.
Then in 2005, she had quit as a member of staff in the wake of the criminal investigation
because she wanted to be clear on what she did and did not have the right to do.
I want to know, Patricia told the judge. I dont understand.
The judge dictated another memo to the clerk of the court. Madame says she left all her posts
in the Church of Scientology in 2005, wanting to know at the end of this trial if the acts that
she had done in the Church of Scientology were legal or not.
And had she been under any pressure to withdraw? Not at all, she replied. The judge made a
note of that, too.
The prosecutor, Caliman, asked her few questions, but he had an elaborate way of framing
them that confused her, so he did not get the clear answers he was seeking.
She could not help him with his final question either: Were there procedures that you had to
go through before you got your money back?
I dont know, said Patricia. I dont understand.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Photo of the e-meter courtesy of 'Salimfadhley', Wikimedia, Creative Commons licence.

10. Prosecutor sick: Belgian Scientology

trial delayed

Belgium's trial of Scientology has been delayed after the

prosecutor who has followed the case for nearly two decades
fell ill.
Belgiums trial of the Church of Scientology and a dozen of its members has been interrupted
for two weeks after the prosecutor in charge of the case was taken ill.
News of Christophe Caliman's illness came the same day a Scientology group announced it
had filed a complaint against him with a UN body for egregious human rights violations.
Caliman was not present when the trial resumed Monday morning after a week-long break.
Prosecutor Jean-Pascal Thoreau told the court that his colleague had been taken ill. At the
start of the afternoons proceedings he said that Caliman would be on sick leave until Friday,
November 20 and asked for the prosecutor's closing arguments to be postponed.
Caliman had originally been scheduled to present his much-awaited closing argument on
Tuesday. Since the prosecution case is that the Church of Scientology Belgium is a criminal
organisation, observers have been waiting to see if he would call for its dissolution. Another
Scientology organisation, the Brussels-based European Office for Public Affairs and Human
Rights is also on trial.
Judge Yves Rgimont, after consulting with the lawyers, pushed back the schedule: the
prosecutors closing arguments are now set for Tuesday, November 24, with defence
arguments starting on November 30.

If, on November 24, Caliman is not able to present his arguments, his colleague Thoreau will
have to step in. He made it clear Monday that this arrangement would be far from ideal. His
presence at the trial was more to provide technical support to his colleague, he explained.
Caliman has a detailed knowledge of what has become a massive case file incorporating two
separate investigations. He has worked on it for nearly two decades and in court has taken the
lead in questioning the defendants.
Thoreau, though an experienced prosecutor in his own right, would be at a distinct
disadvantage if he had to take over. But as Judge Rgimont made clear, the other
commitments of the defence lawyers and the three judges would make it very difficult to
change the trial calendar any further.
News of prosecutor Calimans illness came the same day that a Scientology group announced
it had lodged a complaint against him with the UN Special Rapporteur for International
Religious Freedom.
The Scientologists Alliance for Freedom in Europe (SAFE) did not name M. Caliman in its
complaint. But it denounced the prosecutor in charge of the case for having ...initiated an
intrusive, 18 year-old investigation into sincerely held Scientology religious beliefs and
peaceful religious practices targeting Scientologists and the Scientology religious
community.
From Spain, SAFE spokesman Ivan Arjona said in the statement: I live in a country where
Scientology is recognized as a religion by the State, and where the rights of Scientologists are
protected as they are in most European countries that respect religious freedom as part of our
common heritage.
Yet, the prosecutor has trampled on the rights of Scientologists in Belgium to religious
freedom for over two decades, requiring Scientologists everywhere to stand up for their rights
and protest religious persecution.
They were asking the Special Rapporteur to monitor the trial and to take up their complaint
with the Belgian government, he added.
SAFE describes itself as a grassroots initiative by Scientologists from all over Europe
whose aim it to promote human rights, particularly in the field of religious freedom.
The Belgian trial of Scientology opened on October 26 and has so far run for five days. The
defendants deny charges of fraud; extortion; criminal organisation; forgery and the use of
false documents; violation of privacy; and the illegal practice of medicine.
Under the revised schedule, the defence will start its closing arguments on November 30.
Given that there are 12 individuals and two organisations on trial, they will run over eight
days until December 11.
The prosecutor has had health problems before. In September 2010 Caliban was taken ill
during a trial and had to be hospitalised.

11. A Sacred Science

Scientology's Purification Rundown is both a spiritual

procedure and a scientifically valid process, a defendant told
the Brussels trial of the Church.
Judge Yves Rgimont turned to the next of the defendants, Bernadette P.* She had worked on
various staff posts, starting in 1990 as a case supervisor. Between 1998 and 2001 she had
served in a more senior post: executive secretary of the Church of Scientology in Brussels.
Bernadette seemed much more sure of herself than the previous defendant; more alert and
more willing to defend herself.
Asked by the judge to summarise her time in Scientology, she explained that she had trained
as an auditor and then as a case supervisor. Auditing, she explained, was a kind of pastoral
counselling.
I want to put things in a more religious context, she said, picking up a theme advanced the
previous day by fellow defendant Vincent G.
Why does what we do have to do with religious, or spiritual procedures? she asked
rhetorically. The aim is that people should be more awakened and they should see
themselves as a spiritual being, she said.
The whole point of auditing and Scientologys Purification Rundown, which the judge has
already asked other defendants about, was about making people more more awake, more alert,
For us, this is something spiritual, she said.
Towards what end, the judge wanted to know. Towards a greater sense of well-being,
Bernadette replied. Towards a greater sense of awareness.
Bernadette launched into a defence of Purification Rundown, the programme, devised by
Scientologys founder L. Ron Hubbard, which combines aerobic exercises, sessions in the
sauna and increasingly large doses of vitamins and minerals.
Her main contention was that there were toxic elements stuck in the body that were
preventing peoples spiritual progress and that the Rundown was designed to fix that.

Judge Rgimont had already mentioned that the case files contained doctors reports critical
of the Rundown. Bernadette however, had no doubts about Hubbard's claims for the
programme.
We have found that, scientifically, [toxic] residues remain in the body and so the person will
be less alert than they could be, she said. The whole point of the Rundown was to remedy
that, making the subject more aware, more alert and thus better prepared for auditing.
But staff always made it clear to people entering their premises that they were in a church and
that the courses they were doing were part of a spiritual path.
More generally, she said that Scientologists considered people to be spiritual beings, and that
Scientology training was about teaching people how to act on their environment rather than
just reactint to it. The Rundown was part of that broader mission.

Did you have enough knowledge of the consequences?" the

judge asked.
Judge Rgimont brought the discussion back to specifics.
He wanted to know more about the medical checks people had before doing the Rundown.
When you send someone to a doctor, have you had doctors who have said, No this is not for
you,?
Certainly, said Bernadette: there had been people with kidney problems who had been told by
doctors that they could not do the Rundown.
She had already said that people were not pushed into it, that they requested it when they
thought they were ready; and that there was a kind of informal interview to decide if they
were eligible. But the judge wanted more detail.
So how can you tell that the person is sufficiently strong? he asked.
She decided on the basis of whether the person had had enough psychological training, she
said by which she presumably meant auditing. And if she thought they were ready, she
would send them along to a doctor with a book or a leaflet about the Rundown.
But surely, said the judge, she could not expect the doctor to read the book. Were the patients
meant to tell the doctor about the large quantities of vitamins and minerals they would be
taking on the Rundown?
I remember when people went to the doctor there was a very simple flyer, Bernadette
replied.
And during the Rundown itself asked the judge, who decided on the daily doses of vitamins
and minerals? Did she think she had sufficient medical knowledge?
This was a path the judge had been down with other defendants already: and since the illegal
practice of medicine in relation to the Purification Rundown was among the charges, these
were not idle questions.

Bernadette said she was not sure that this was medicine.
The judge had the clerk note it down: Madame P., says that so far as the information given to
parishioners for the daily vitamins, she did not consider that it was medicine.
Already, for me, medical means medicine, and the Purification Rundown was not that,
Bernadette added. We were dealing with healthy people.
Did my mother practise medicine when she gave me cod-liver oil when I was a child in
winter?
That did not satisfy the judge.
The fact that you were giving people vitamins at doses that rose to quite high levels: did you
have enough knowledge of the consequences? he asked.
Or did you say, Mr. Hubbard said that, he has doubtless experimented it must be okay.
Was it a bit like that?
More or less, yes, said Bernadette. When we received instructions on doing the
Purification Rundown, we had information that Ron Hubbard had worked with scientists to
test it.
She mentioned a scientist she had read about who had won a Nobel Prize for his work on
Vitamin C. Through her own reading, she said, she had learned that the problem was not with
vitamins themselves but getting the right balance.
Niacin, one of the vitamins used in the Rundown, has the power of dissolving toxic residues,
she explained. That was why a person doing the Rundown took a little dose of niacin, she
explained. (Niacin is vitamin B3.)
That is in the book? asked Judged Rgimont. He seemed to be referring to Hubbards book
on the Rundown, Clear Body, Clear Mind, mentioned earlier during the trial.
Yes, replied Bernadette.
But it is not necessarily a scientific book, said the judge.
He dictated another note to the court clerk. The defendant, considered that insofar as it was a
book by Mr. Hubbard it was scientifically valid and was corroborated by her personal
reading.

Did you never ask the question, Am I doing something

stupid here?
Bernadette added that she had had discussions with other Scientologists about daily doses for
vitamins and she had been told that there was no law had been passed on that matter. I did
not think I could break a law that did not exist, she added.
Judge Rgimont pressed on.

Were the doses that Mr. Hubbard had set out susceptible to change? he asked. You had no
medical knowledge so I want to know how you could dare take responsibility for something
like this.
Did you never ask the question, Am I doing something stupid here?
Bernadette did not answer the question directly. Instead, she went into a detailed exposition of
how a person who had LSD might relive the hallucinogenic effects of a trip as he did the
Rundown, as the niacin took effect and forced the remains of the LSD out of his body. But
that person would eventually get through that experience and emerge more alert, more aware.
So the guide to whether the Rundown was working was how the person was feeling? That did
not strike the judge as very scientific. Or was it just up to the person supervising the
programme?
Bernadette stressed that after every session, the person doing the Rundown would have an
interview with the supervisor.
But his supervisor is in a sense his person of reference, who is guiding him, the judge
objected. So I have a hard time seeing this person disagreeing.
That has happened, Bernadette assured him. The person has said, Since yesterday I feel
much better. I think we can pass to the next stage.
Judge Rgimont changed tack, asking how much the Rundown cost.
Sold as part of a package, with two sets of intensive auditing (12 and a half hours each) it
would cost 150,000 Belgian francs, Bernadette answered (about 3,700 euros).
That struck the judge as interesting. He mentioned the name of a Mme B., the very first
plaintiff, whose complaint had effectively launched the investigation against Scientology.
She had said she had paid 150,000 Belgian francs to do the Purification Rundown (around
3,700 euros). Yet all the Scientologists had told investigators at the time that the price Mme
B. had cited was nonsense. Now, from what the defendant had just said, it seemed plausible.
So this plaintiff is perhaps not talking rubbish, he said.
At one point in his questioning, the judge picked up on another thread in the file.
Why, he wanted to know, did the fact that someone had had psychological or psychiatric
problems make them ineligible for the Purification Rundown and for auditing?
Surely excluding people who were psychologically fragile amounted to abandoning
responsibility for them. Can Scientology not help them? he asked.
People who have had breakdowns are people who have been weakened and I dont see
myself taking them on, Bernadette replied.
So they dont have their place in the Church of Scientology? asked the judge.

I think people who have had breakdowns could very well have relapses," she added.
You could have had problems in the past and been cured a few years later, the judge
suggested.
Personally, said Bernadette, if someone who has been fragile and has had relapses, I dont
think I can take care of them.
So for you, the judge concluded, it is normal that psychologically fragile people should not
be allowed to take Scientology courses.
Then Judge Rgimont mentioned the name of another woman, a Mme V.
Thus far, the judges habit had been to start with general questions, move to specifics and then
to save the really difficult issues for last: it quickly became clear that he had entered that final
phase.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Picture by Steven Depolo, creative commons licence.

12. The Suicide Memo

The judge at the Belgian trial of Scientology pressed one

defendant to explain why she got a vulnerable member to sign
a suicide disclaimer.
Judge Yves Rgimont, having questioned the defendant Bernadette P.* closely about the
Purification Rundown, turned to a specific case that concerned her, that of a Mme V.
It took a while before the full story came out, but it quickly became clear that the judge had kept
the most difficult questions for the end.

Certainly, Bernadette recognised the name. She asked for time to consult her notes on the
matter, the court adjourned briefly and then they got down to the matter in hand.
Mme V. had done some Scientology courses in the early 1990s, including the Purification
Rundown in 1993. Bernadette consulted her notes. She went to great lengths to explain that
while Mme V. had had some problems during the Rundown, in the end she had reported that
it had done her a lot of good.
But this was not the part of Mme V.s story that most interested the judge.
He was more concerned about an incident that had happened in 1997, four years after she had
taken the Rundown. Mme V.s husband had approached the Church of Scientology asking
them to help his wife, he reminded her.
Bernadette remembered. The husband had said his wife was very tired, so Bernadette said he
should send her in to see her.
She was tired and said she could not handle being a mother, she said. Bernadette advised
her to see a doctor.
Did you not refuse to audit her? asked the doctor.
I gave her some advice, said Bernadette.
According to what he had in his files, said the judge, Bernadette had not wanted to audit Mme
V. because she had psychological problems.
For me, she didnt have psychological problems, she insisted. She was just tired. I told her
to go to the doctor.
Did you not tell her to see a doctor in France? the judge asked. You keep saying that it is
the parishioner who decides. But did this lady at some point say she wanted to be supported
by Scientology? Or had it been her husband?
It was Mme V. who had come seeking auditing, said Bernadette. But since she could see that
she was too tired to be audited she gave her some simple tasks to do instead.
The next time she saw her was three months later, she said. At that point, I realised that this
lady was in very bad shape." The judge had the clerk note that.
She was very disturbed, Bernadette continued. How to explain, she said. It was not easy.
She paused.
Mme V., said Bernadette, had told her that she had had a row with her husband and that as a
way of getting back at him by causing him problems with Scientology she had told
members of the family that she had attempted suicide.
Judge Rgimont consulted the case files. What she was saying did not appear to match what
he had there.

Did she not say that she had tried to commit suicide because
of Scientology? the judge asked.
She didnt want him to spend money on Scientology, he said.
He wanted to reach a certain level and so was spending a lot of money in her opinion to
the point where she did not have enough to support herself, said the judge.
So I wanted to kill myself, he added, apparently quoting from the case files. And it was
then that you sent her to see a Dr. Boublil.
Bernadette did not recall it that way, but the judge persisted. Dr. Boublil, he said: a
Scientologist; a doctor in Paris; a specialist.
Apparently he is a pediatrician, ventured Bernadette. I insisted that she see a doctor, she
added. Where Boublils name had come into it, she did not know.
The judge changed tack. Can you audit someone if they havent paid? he asked.
Normally no, replied Bernadette.
The husband had said that he had paid money over so that his wife could be audited but that
you had refused to give the auditing, said the judge.
No, said Bernadette: she had explained to Mme V. that no money had been paid. The judge
had the clerk note that too.
The defendant, he dictated, says that she told Mme V. that her husband had not paid for or
ordered religious services; that in any case it was she who had to authorize the giving of such
services; and that given Mme V.s psychological state she could not give her clearance for
auditing.
A little later however, she added that unknown to her, as she was talking to Mme V., her
husband had gone to the bank to make the payments for her auditing. But she had
subsequently ensured that the money had been refunded. At some point the sum of 180,000
Belgian francs (4,460 euros) was mentioned: but it was not clear if it was in relation to this
incident or another.
The judge also referred in passing to the Scientology term PTS, which stands for Potential
Trouble Source. (In Scientology, a person considered PTS cannot receive any auditing.) But if
Mme V. was considered PTS, it was not made clear why.
Judge Rgimont asked about Overts and Withholds. What were they?
They are something a person has done that they shouldnt have done, Bernadette explained.
In Mme V.s case, she added, She said she had done bad things, and had said bad things
about her husband to her mother.

So she had suggested to Mme V., that if it would help her she could write up her Overts
and Withholds.
The husband was there, she stressed. I was in the other room and she wrote what she
wanted.
It was only when she had read it later that she saw the reference to the suicide attempt.
Finally, the judge got to the heart of the matter.
Did she not say that she had tried to commit suicide because of Scientology? he asked.
That doesnt ring a bell?
What Mme V. had told her was not coherent, said Bernadette. But the judge persisted.
She didnt speak of her family, but of Scientology, he said.
You say that you dont remember if she said this to you or if you read it in the Overts [and
Withholds] that she tried to commit suicide to get the attention of her mother.
But Bernadette's version of events did not seem to square with what he had in the case files.
Mme V. had not been happy with the fact that Scientology staff were often contacting her
husband, said the judge. Then at some point down the line, she had been asked to write up her
Overts and Withholds.
Overts and Withholds; PTS; the judge seemed to be suggesting that so far as he could tell
from the documents in front of him, Scientology had been treating her as a problem rather
than trying to help her.
And then there was the matter of the document that Bernadette had requested from Mme V.

I wanted to defend my Church. I thought it was normal.

Gradually, it emerged that Bernadette had gone out to Mme V.s home one night to persuade
her to sign a declaration to the effect that her suicide attempt had had nothing to do with
Scientology.
I thought she had done it without meaning to, said Bernadette, referring, apparently, to the
fact that Mme V. had linked Scientology to her suicide attempt.
Mme V. had told her that she had lied to her parents about attempting suicide, she explained.
I am a member of the Church of Scientology and I think it is normal that the truth is
revealed. When something like that happens it is always seen very badly so I wanted to
defend my Church. I thought it was normal.
I didnt know what to do, she said. So she had consulted another Scientologist, who had
advised her to go and see Mme V. about her signing such a document.
Perhaps that was not the best thing to do, she conceded. Perhaps I was mistaken.

But your starting point was that she was talking nonsense, said the judge.
That she was confused, said Bernadette.
Someone who was confused and was thus weak, the judge continued. And she made a
certain number of statements.
"But you thought, Im not sure what did happen, but if we have her sign a document to the
effect that if she did try to commit suicide, it wasnt Scientologys fault ...
Here we have someone who could pose a risk, the judge continued. You have doubts about
what happened, the details of the suicide attempt. But the person is clearly disturbed. Did you
not think to leave it for a few days?"
In answer to further questioning, Bernadette confirmed that the document in question had
ended up with Scientologys Office of Special Affairs. (OSA handles public relations, legal
matters and external affairs.)
The judge still did not understand: why they had gone to such lengths to get this document
from someone who was clearly vulnerable?
What is the point of that document? he asked. Is it to get Scientology off the hook in the
event that Mme V. actually went ahead and actually did it?
Yes, it could be, said Bernadette.
And why, the judge asked, had the document gone to OSA?
Because this type of document is handled by them, she answered.
So this woman was a danger to Scientology, said the judge.
Yes, I suppose so. It seems a bit like that.
Fortunately, the judge noted, the woman concerned had not taken her own life. And with that,
he dropped that line of questioning.
Further questioning established that Bernadette had left her staff job in Scientology in 2005
and the Church in 2010.
After the judge's examination of the defendant, the prosecutor found he had very little to add.
After discussing the timetable or the rest of the week with the defence lawyers, Judge
Rgimont brought the second day's proceedings to a close.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.

Interior, Palais de Justice, Bruxelles, by Jean Housen Travail personnel. Sous licence CC
BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

13. Shut down Scientology in Belgium:

prosecutor

The Belgian prosecutor who has followed the investigation of

Scientology for nearly two decades called for the Church there
to be shut down.
Shut down the Church of Scientology in Belgium, the prosecutor told the judge Wednesday,
in the trial of the Church and 12 individuals.
Scientology was set up with the principal aim of making money, said the Christophe Caliman,
who also called for the maximum permissible fine of 200,000 euros.
The methods Scientology used, as set out in the writings of its founder L. Ron Hubbard,
explicitly endorsed the criminal activities listed in the indictment, he argued. They include
fraud, extortion and the illegal practice of medicine.
Caliman called for relatively minor sentences against the 12 individuals on trial. In part, he said,
that was because most of the events in question dated back so many years.

Already Tuesday, he had announced at the beginning of his closing arguments that he was
dropping the case against Scientology's European Office for Public Affairs and Human
Rights.
But the main thrust of his closing arguments was aimed at establishing that Scientology was a
criminal organisation, as set out in the indictment.
Whatever crimes the individual defendants had committed, said Caliman, it was not through
over-zealousness: they had simply carried out the orders set down in the voluminous policy
letters left by Hubbard.

Hubbard had insisted on the constant expansion of Scientology and internal documents not
accessible to ordinary parishioners constantly stressed the need to keep the money coming in - and keep the pressure on ordinary members to buy more courses.
The Church of Scientology in Belgium was part of a pyramid sales organisation that reported
to an organisation in the United States, said Caliman.
The prosecutor spent a lot of time focusing on the alleged violations of Belgian's strict privacy
laws. Scientologists were required to fill in questionnaires and to submit to interrogations
known as security checks during which they were expected to divulge intimate details of their
life.
Some of it was often stocked indefinitely in Scientology files and some of it was sent back
and forth between Belgium and more senior organisations in the United States without the
consent of those concerned.
The fact that Scientology kept such intimate details of its members' private lives on file also
spoke to the charge of extortion, said Caliman.
The Church also operated a "ferocious" disciplinary system in which members were
encouraged, required even, to denounce each other for perceived offences or risk being
disciplined themselves for having failed to do so.
Scientologists who joined staff signed a document in which they agreed to pay the cost of the
free training they were to receive as staffers if ever they left before completing their contract,
he said. The threat of that bill hanging over them dissuaded some Scientologists from quitting
staff when they wanted to.

"It is not very hard to grasp the basic principle underlying all
policy letters and organisation," Hubbard wrote. "All our
policy ... is built on EXPANSION..."
On Scientology's alleged illegal practice of medicine, Caliman focussed in particular on the
Purification Rundown, a programme of exercise, sauna sessions and doses of vitamins and
minerals devised by Hubbard.
An experts' report had concluded that the Purification Rundown was a fraud and that the
programme did not purge toxins from the body as Scientology claimed, he said.
Doctors had expressed particular concern about the health risks posed by the high doses of
Vitamin B3, or niacin: side effects could include dyspepsia, nausea, diarrohea and the
aggravation of diabetes.
Auditing, Scientology's version of spiritual counselling, could also be qualified as illegal
practice of medicine because of the claims Hubbard had made for it, Caliman added.
Hubbard had contended that chronically ill people were PTS a Scientology concept meaning
someone is a Potential Trouble Source because they are linked to a suppressive person (such
as an enemy of the Church).

"The moment you take that attitude you can claim to cure anything, if all sick people are
PTS," said Caliman. He read out internal memos seized during police raids in which
Scientologists judged to be PTS were sent to do the Purification Rundown to be cured.
But Scientologists were also required to do auditing to resolve this PTS condition, said
Caliman. Since illnesses were being redefined as a problem to be audited away, this practice
too constituted the illegal practice of medicine.
Another policy letter by Hubbard said "touch assists" a kind of Scientology laying-on of
hands, were sometimes indispensable for patients if they were to respond to conventional
medical treatment. This too amounted to the illegal practice of medicine, said the prosecutor.
The Church of Scientology in Belgium is a franchise following the directives of the Mother
Church in Los Angeles, said Caliman: as per Hubbard's detailed policy letters they had to pay
their sales people, Field Staff Members, a fix percentage commission; they had to keep
sending staff up to more senior Scientology organisations according to specific quotas.
"The Church of Scientology Belgium is part of a pyramid sales organisation," said Caliman.
And the guiding principle driving it was clearly set out in a key Hubbard policy letter, he
added.
"It is not very hard to grasp the basic principle underlying all policy letters and
organisation," Hubbard wrote. "All our policy ... is built on EXPANSION...
"Thus when you are interpreting policy it should be interpreted only against EXPANSION as
the single factor governing it."
"Expansion Theory of Policy", December 4, 1966 policy letter.
The lucrative nature of the operation was underlined by the findings in a tax specialist's
report for the investigator. He found that the profit on book sales, which made up a
substantial part of the Church's income, was 100 percent.
Hard sell techniques formed part of Scientology's standard operating procedure, said Caliman.
And again, it was all set out in Hubbard's own writings.
Lawyers for the defence will begin their closing arguments next Monday and they are
expected to run for two weeks.
Matre Pascal Vanderveeren, representing the Church of Scientology Belgium, has told the
court they will coordinate their presentations to try to avoid needless repetition. His speech
though, will be a cornerstone of the defence that Church will mount.
Illustration, Au Palais, by Monique Martin, Fondation Monique Martin and reproduced with
their kind permission.

14. Personal data and the INVESTfiles

A Scientology executive on trial in Belgium denied his office

kept files on those whom the movement considered its
enemies.
At the start of the third day of the Belgian trial of Scientology, it was the turn of Fabio A.* to
answer the questions put by the judge Yves Rgimont.
He was quizzed about a mass mailing to euro-deputies that might have broken Belgium's
privacy laws; and he denied a suggestion from the prosecutor that his office collected
information on enemies in so-called INVEST files.
Fabio was perhaps the most senior of the Scientologists so far questioned: a former director of
the European Office of Public Affairs and Human Rights also known as Church of
Scientology International one of the two Scientology organisations charged.
An Italian, he had nevertheless chosen to follow proceedings via an English interpreter and to
answer the judges questions in English.
He explained to the court that his job as director of the Office was to manage its social and
humanitarian programmes and inform the public about Scientologys good works. He had
worked in a similar role for the Church of Scientology in Italy before arriving in Belgium.
The work of the Office included distributing information on the dangers of drugs, promoting
human rights and moral values, he said. And while these campaigns were led by Scientology
they were mainly offered to outside groups to adopt: both private organisations and
governments.
Judge Rgimont was puzzled: so where, he asked, did the International Association of
Scientologists (IAS) come in? He had quizzed more than one of the defendants about the large
sums of money they had paid into the IAS, over and above what they had paid for Scientology
goods and services. They had told him it was the IAS that financed the Churchs good works.
Fabio put it this way. The International Association of Scientologists is an association of
members in the sense that it unites members and advances the aims of Scientology and

naturally it raises funds to carry out its humanitarian work; the work that is done by the
Church of Scientology.
Just as the Catholic Church had Caritas to gather funding so the Catholic Church could do its
good works, so the Church of Scientology had the IAS, he added.
A useful comparison, the judge noted: so the IAS raised the funds for the Church of
Scientology to carry out its projects. But then I still dont I still dont see what role the
European Office plays, unless it is carrying out the Church of Scientologys projects. What is
its exact role? he asked.
They went over it again because, as the judge put it, It was not easy to understand just who
was financing what. But finally the picture that emerged was this: the IAS raised the money to
give to the Church of Scientology International so it could pay for the publications and run the
humanitarian programmes.
Judge Rgimont turned to some of the alleged offences that concerned Fabio himself,
including criminal organisation and violation of Belgiums strict privacy laws.
The judge had already questioned at least one defendant on the issue of privacy earlier in the
trial about the files Scientology kept on its members. This time it was more about the use of
data on people outside the Church.
He raised the issue of a letter sent in early 2004 to Members of the European Parliament
(MEPs) to promote a campaign that the European Office had put together for the Church of
Scientology.
It emerged that, while these letters had been written mainly in French, a legal note at the
bottom had been written in English. Another issue that appeared to be a potential problem was
the fact that these letters had been sent from the United States.
Belgiums privacy laws place clear restrictions not just on the collection of personal data, but
how that data may be used and its transfer abroad, as this summary from the countrys Privacy
Commission makes clear. According to the indictment, that letter was a violation of
Belgiums privacy laws.

We were poorly advised.

Coming from Italy, Fabio A. could perhaps not be expected to know every detail of Belgian
law, said the judge: but he must have been surrounded by competent advisors.
Were you not briefed on the current legislation on this and other matters? Judge Rgimont
asked. Yes, he had been, said Fabio.
Did you not know that there was a law regulating the protection of private life? asked the
judge. Yes he did, in the broad outlines.
Were you advised by people who were meant to know this kind of legislation better than
you?

Yes there was a lawyer who advised us on how to proceed with these letters, said Fabio.
And we followed the advice of this lawyer.
And did this lawyer not know about the information at the bottom of the letter? Part of the
problem appeared to be that the letter to the MEPs had not included certain legally required
information or at least not in French.
I know Belgium is the capital of Europe, but its not certain everyone speaks English, said
the judge.
Yes, Fabio acknowledged. It was a material error that was quickly corrected.
But this happened in 2004, said the judge years after the relevant legislation had been
passed. Surely it followed from this that the issue of privacy would have been raised. Could
they not at least have got the language in the letter right?
Yes, replied Fabio. As I said, it was a material error that was quickly corrected. But as he
recalled it, he added, their lawyer had not warned them about this problem.
So you were poorly advised? asked the judge.
Yes, thats right, said Fabio. Yes, if that should have been in French then that was an error
and we were poorly advised. But again, he stressed, they had corrected it as soon as they
noticed the error.
Well, as soon as you were informed, said the judge. Because it was not just the
information at the bottom but the collection of the information.
Judge Rgimont asked about the mailing list used for the mail shots to the Euro-deputies.
Fabio said it had been from a CD-ROM they had bought in Brussels commercially,
supplemented with addresses they had found on various websites. These addresses were in
the public domain, he stressed.
So you acquired a CD commercially. said the judge. He had the clerk note that: Mr. A says
that the information concerning the addresses for the letters sent to the MEPs was mainly
acquired through the purchase of a CD-ROM in a shop.
I wont go so far as asking which shop, said the judge. This information didnt come from
the United States?
No, said Fabio.
So you bought this information in Brussels, but it wasnt sent from there, the judge
continued.
Thats right, said Fabio. It was sent from the United States.
And why was that, the judge wanted to know.
We sent the information to them, he said.

And had they kept this information?

No, we dont have this now: 11 years have passed, said Fabio.
But at the time he was questioned about this affair, he had told investigators that the
information had been kept for five years, said the judge.
When did I say that? asked Fabio, puzzled. This was important because Belgiums privacy
laws also stipulated how long personal data could be kept.
This was what he had told investigators when they had interviewed him in September 2004,
the judge told him.
If it is written, then I must have said it, replied Fabio, a strange echo of one of Hubbards
better-known dictums: If it isnt written, it isnt true. (HCOPL Feb. 9, 1979 How to defeat
Verbal Tech Checklist)
But after that, he added, I dont know if it was kept for five years. The only reason we
obtained these addresses was in connection with this project. It had not been their intention
to hold on to the data.
The judge had the clerk of the court note that down too: Monsieur says that the use of this
information and addresses was only directed at this specific campaign.

He denied his office kept files on Scientologys enemies.

So if I understand you, said the judge, Supposing that there were infractions, it was not
intentional: there was no intention to break the law.
Thats right, said Fabio A. It was done in good faith on the advice of a lawyer. If we had
been advised differently, we would have acted accordingly and that is why we acted as we
did.
The judge had the clerk note that down too. Fabio added that he had not been aware at the
time that he might be breaking the law.
The judge gave the floor to the prosecutor, Christophe Caliman. He wanted to know more
about the lawyer concerned. A little probing established that they had contacted him on their
own initiative and that it was not the first time they had used him. But Fabio A. could not
remember who had first recommended him.
Then the prosecutor asked about what he called the INVEST files (short for investigation).
What, Caliman asked, was a human rights office doing investigating people? That suggested
that they were busy gathering information on their supposed enemies, he said.
No, we dont have this kind of data, said Fabio. He had already explained that the focus of
their work was social and humanitarian.
Prosecutor Caliman asked the judge to have that noted by the clerk.

Monsieur A. says that the European office did not have INVEST files or any other file that
would have been devoted to collecting information on enemies of the Church of
Scientology, the judge dictated to the clerk.
At his lawyers prompting, Fabio offered a little more detail on some of the various
international institutions with which the Office worked: they included the United Nations
Office on Drugs and Crime and membership of a number of UN committees. Their links with
the European Commission were also excellent, he added.
And did he know anything about Narconon, the prosecutor wanted to know. Narconon is a
drug rehabilitation programme run along principles set out by Scientologys founder L. Ron
Hubbard.
Prosecutor Calimans point appeared to be that Narconon uses the process known as the
Purification Rundown in the religious setting of the Church of Scientology, but in a nonreligious, medical context. During his work with all these international groups, he asked, had
Fabio promoted the Purification Rundown?
I dont especially deal with this programme..., said Fabio A. We havent particularly
worked in this domain in the European office. The judge had the clerk note that.
Prosecutor Caliman asked several questions too about Fabio A.s working relationship with
another of the defendants, Martin W., who also worked at the Office of Public Affairs and
Human Rights.
Fabio A. had already said he was Martin W.s superior, but from what emerged later, the
prosecutor may not have been convinced of that.
Did they see each other day, the prosecutor wanted to know. Was he kept informed of Mr.
W.s activities or were their links relatively distant?
We worked together, said Fabio. But given that Mr. W. is a grown man and perfectly
capable, I didnt have to accompany him like a child. I had perfect confidence in him, he
added. The work he did in human rights was quite visible.
But my question was What was your link?, said the prosecutor. Formal or close?
He handled human rights, I ran the office, and so I was regularly informed of what he did,
said Fabio.
The judge had all of that noted, but there was some amusement when, during his dictation, he
inadvertently reformulated Fabio A.s answer: Mr. W. is an adult and competent in his field
and so he did not have to be followed like a little dog
Fabio A. corrected him, the judge apologised
didnt have to followed like a child.
The court adjourned, before the questioning of the next witness.

15. "Students to recover"

Quitting Scientology is not as simple as just walking out the

door, the Belgian trial of the Church heard
It was a Catholic priest who introduced him to Scientology, Stphane J. told the court. A
Catholic priest who was also a Scientologist.(1)
On Thursday, the third day of the trial, it was Stphane's turn to trace his progress through
Scientology for the president of the court, Judge Yves Rgimont. For health reasons, he
preferred to remain seated to give his testimony.
When Stphane started to tell the judge about the auditing he had received at the start of his
progress through Scientology, the judge asked how an auditor could help someone he knew
nothing about.
How can they audit you when they dont know you? he asked. How can this auditing be as
efficient as with an auditing sessions after the OCA? The judge was referring to
Scientologys Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA), a questionnaire Hubbard devised that is
often offered to prospective members as a personality test.
Stphane reassured the judge: auditors did not need the OCA results to effectively audit
someone. To get people up the Bridge, he said, the auditor applied everything they had
learned to eliminate all negative emotions and incidents in the auditing subject. To illustrate
his point, he gave an example of what he said auditing could achieve.
My wife was a gymnast and had an accident and so couldnt compete anymore, he said.
Then she had some auditing sessions. When she came out of her auditing session she did a
flip salto, [a forward flip] as if she had never been operated on.
Early on, he said, he had done Scientology courses because he too wanted to be an auditor. I
always wanted to help people and and then I found Scientology, something clicked and it was
that that I wanted to do. So my first aim was to be an auditor.
These courses, said the judge. Theyre no pushover (cest pas donn). You have to do the
hours and pay for them.

Stphane agreed. While he had not been paying much back in 1984, it got more expensive
later. So at some point along the way, he decided to join staff to become an auditor, quitting
his job as a typographer. But he resisted any suggestion that he had signed on as staff because
of the rising cost of auditing. The price was not the issue, he said. It was to help people.
Four months into his staff job, he realized that there were only nine members of staff and he
needed to do his share. The others were putting all their energy into advancing the Church,
so I decided to change direction.
He took up a job in Division 1: personnel, ethics and communication. But he was also
involved in the Ethics division, the judge noted, which appeared to be a fairly important post.
You arrived in the Church, said the judge. You stopped your studies to be an auditor was
it you who decided or was it someone else?
It was me who decided, given that we were only nine people, Stphane replied. They were
so few, he explained, that each member of staff had several jobs or hats, as Scientologists
put it.

Why did all these people say They did not stop harassing
me? the judge asked.
Judge Rgimont spent some time trying to get a clearer idea of just who it was decided which
courses a new Scientologist did: was it the client, or was it the staffers dealing with him?
Who, for example, decided when a person was ready to do the Purification Rundown?
Stphane appeared to suggest that it was a bit of both: the case supervisor decided, based on
what he found in the students files; but the person himself usually knew when he was ready.
The Bridge to Total Freedom passes through several stages, said Stphane. The preclear
[someone on the early stages of Scientologys programme] knows when he has passed that
stage.
He decides? asked the judge.
The course supervisor decides He becomes more conscious and is ready to attest with
the agreement of the case supervisor.
So if someone wanted to move on to the next stage, they could say so, said the judge. And
could students stop when they wanted to?
Yes, said Stphane: I can give you an example, he added. But the judge wanted to pursue
his train of thought.
If one can stop when one wants and that is what people have been telling me since Monday
the common denominator of each is that it is the student who decides to buy a course or not;
and it is the parishioner who decides to stop or not; to leave the church or not, said the judge.
So thus far it is clear that one can enter and leave as one wants.
And if you put the same question, I would say the same thing, said Stphane.

But Judge Rgimont had been looking at the case files.

I found a list of students, said the judge: a 1998 list that Stphane had drawn up of students
to recover (rcuperer). He wanted to know more.
There are the names, the level they are following one is PTS/SP I even see Monsieur G.
here, the judge added, referring to another defendant, Vincent G.
So what does that mean? the judge asked. That makes me think of someone who wants to
leave but you, you are not going to let them leave like that.
Normally, these are people who have abandoned their courses without finishing them, said
Stphane. And our responsibility was to at least have them finish.
But these people dont have to finish their courses, the judge insisted. They can get a refund,
no? So what is this for? Scientologys language is perhaps not the same as the French
language, but when it is written here that someone must be recovered...?
So it is that the term Stphane began.
is badly put? the judge broke in.
Stphane tried again. If someone had not finished course, it was because they had not
understood something, he said. That was a basic precept from Hubbards writings. And so it
is our duty to help them complete it. It is not as if we are phoning them every 25 minutes.
Judge Rgimont did not seem satisfied. What Stphane was saying did not appear to square
with what he had in his files.
The plaintiffs in the case were no longer here, he said. But there are people who were
disappointed, he said. Why did all these people say They did not stop harassing me? the
judge asked. They have very detailed accounts of what happened. Even if you take these
accounts with caution, there are a lot of people saying this.
Judge Rgimont remarked that he had already been rebuked for not understanding how the
Scientology system worked a reference to exchanges with some of the defence lawyers
earlier that week ...but when I see a document on Students to Recover I see someone who
has left who must be contacted to get him back.

"Can you not just go through the door and leave?" the judge
asked.
No, said Stphane. The aim is not to oblige people to stay in Scientology, but only to
ensure that they have not left because they have not understood something or had a clash with
another Scientologist which has happened in the past.
Our aim is that these people and all the people on the planet go up the Bridge, he added.
But why recover? the judge asked. In Scientology, even when one writes in French it is
not French, he added, increasingly exasperated.

I dont see why recover is a problem, said Stphane. A student is in a course, he is not
there any more, we want to find out why. And when students did come back and finished
their course nine out of ten of them were happy they had, he added.
So is there a procedure? asked the judge. Do you say, We really have to know if they
really want it, before you refund their money, before you let them leave?
The idea is to see whether we have made a mistake, said Stphane.
So its for you, not them, said the judge.
Nine-tenths of the time, when they come back, they are happy, Stphane replied. If the
student comes back they will be interviewed to find out why it didnt work, and anything
mistaken will be set right.
But if the student wants to leave then they can, he insisted. It was not as if they were
holding a gun to their head. If someone wants to leave they will leave in any case.
And what about staff, the judge wanted to know. Stphane explained that staff who wanted to
leave would have to fill out a routing form, go through Ethics and speak to the chaplain.
But the judge was still chewing over the previous answer.
Why do you always have to ensure that there has not been a mistake? he asked. If someone
works for a bank. he left the point hanging, but it was fairly clear: in any normal job, you
just quit.
Stphane tried again. I will want to know if there is a problem with your work, or with your
colleagues. It is important. And that wasnt just a Scientology thing, he added.
Judge Rgimont moved on to another document. This one dated from 1991, when Stphane
had occupied a fairly senior executive position. He had written to a Mme K. about the fact
that she had not routed out properly from a staff position.
If she did not come in to fill out the staff routing out form, he had written, she would be
declared suppressive, as per Hubbards written directives on the matter. (2) The judge wanted
to know more.
It was because she had not left staff correctly, said Stphane. But the judge was not satisfied:
if you want leave, he asked: Can you not just go through the door and leave?
In the world of Scientology, there are certain stages to go through, which staff members
know very well said Stphane. They had to go to see the Ethics Officer and apply Hubbards
directives on these matters. As I recall, he added, Mme K. came back and followed these
steps and left and she was not declared suppressive.
So does that not mean that these people are constrained by the rules of Mr. Hubbard? asked
the judge. It was just like any workplace, said Stphane. When I worked at the printworks, I
couldnt just arrive when I wanted to.

The judge tried another analogy: if a student signed up to study medicine at university and
then, three months in, decided it was not for them, there would be no procedure to follow to
quit.
Certainly, said Stphane. But that is not the case in the Church of Scientology, and
experience has shown to Mr. Hubbard that two-thirds of these situations can be resolved.
But he added: If someone wants to leave, they can go. My son decided not to continue with
services, and that was it.
But that was your son, said the judge.
Whether it is my son or not is neither here nor there, Stphane replied.

For me, the most important rule is not to break the law,
Stphane protested.
The judge tried another scenario. Someone finishes their courses and decides that there are
some good things but nevertheless decides to leave and do other things
Im trying to understand here Judge Rgimont was citing another document now: it
appeared to be one of Hubbards policy letters listing high crimes, the kind of offences for
which one could be cast out of the movement and declared suppressive, an enemy of the
movement. This policy letter instructed Scientologists to cut off all contact with anyone
asking for a refund.(3)
And what was a Suppressive Person anyway?
A Suppressive Person is a person who suppresses the Church of Scientology, or who breaks
the copyrighted materials to do something else (with them), which is one of the major
crimes, said Stphane. Because Mr. Hubbard developed a technology that works as he
applied it but not when others adopt it, he added.
But what does all this mean? the judge asked. The idea he was getting was that when
someone wanted to move on from Scientology and so something else, that was not okay with
Mr. Hubbard or with Scientology officials. So you have to exclude them, he said. It is a
kind of social death of the person.
Stphane did not agree. He knew at least three people who had left Scientology in recent
years, he said. We have remained friends, and they are still ready to defend Scientology, he
added. Certainly there are rules and laws, and like you, we require that they are respected.
The prosecutor took a different view, the judge reminded him. His view was that
Scientologys rules, its laws, did not correspond with Belgian law.
The prosecutor saw your rules, your criminal code, as those of a society running parallel to
Belgian society, but which by its rule and attitude violated Belgiums laws. Can we put it
like that? asked the judge.
No, said Stphane: it wasnt like that.

Monsieur le Procureur says there are rules in Belgian society. You dont follow them
according to him. And that was why he was in court, the judge continued just as
Scientology had its own courts.
What is the difference between the rules defended by Monsieur le Procureur and the rules
that you have in your society? he asked.
I am part of a church, said Stphane. And when Judge Rgimont pressed him on the
possibility that Scientologys rules might break Belgian laws, he protested: For me, the most
important rule is not to break the law.
But your rules, said the judge. You dont want to break them.
But the rules of Scientology are natural, said Stphane. Arrive on time to courses. It was
an example that his fellow defendant, Vincent G., had offered in his account of Scientology
ethics.
Fair enough, said the judge: he got that part. But, he added: What I am trying to understand
is that in the Church of Scientology you have rules regarding people who want to leave,
and those who dont respect the rules are declared Suppressive Persons. Fine.
But what is the difference between your need to have your rules respected, and the position
of the prosecutor who says that you have not respected the rules of Belgian society and [that
he] wants them respected? the judge asked.
We have an organisation that has rules. Fine. They have to be respected. But according to the
prosecutor you have to respect the rules of Belgian society.
So what, the judge asked, was the difference between what the prosecutor was doing, ...and
what you have done to those people who wanted to leave?
What is the difference?

"I assure you, we have other documents," said the judge.

The judge did not sound angry so much as frustrated, exasperated: he was still trying to get an
answer to what he clearly considered a key question.
There was a long pause.
I would say that the process is similar, said Stphane at last. The aim is to have Belgian
law respected, and the aim is to have Scientology law respected. The way it is done is perhaps
not the same, he added.
The prosecutor had not charged them under Scientologys rules but Belgiums laws, said the
judge. He was about to to go back to the document asking about recovering people, when
one of the defence lawyers came to Stphanes rescue.
The first principle in Scientology was to respect the laws of the country, she said.
Theyve all said that at least 10 times, said the judge. Thats fine.

Mr. Hubbard says that one of the rules of Scientology is that the laws of the country should
be respected, she added.(4)
Matre Quentin Wauters, another of the defence lawyers, stepped in. You are asking him
about general points, he objected. These same questions are not put to the others: why not?
His point, it seemed, was that the defendants were not being tackled on the specific charges
against them individually, but questioned more generally, an objection that the defence had
raised earlier.
The judge did not appreciate the intervention. Since Monday, he had been getting
observations about how he was conducting the trial. First he had been criticised for asking
questions that were too general: then again when his questions were too specific.
So on what basis do you want me to put my questions? he asked. I am citing the
documents and trying to answer all the objections put which I dont always do. So what do
want me to do?
Once again, Judge Rgimont made it clear he wanted to understand how Scientology worked,
how the defendants saw it: but still, he said, he was getting objections. So once again, he
brandished the doomsday option. He could stop the questioning right there and then and move
to straight legal arguments, he said.
Mtr. Wauters stood his ground. He could only speak for his two clients, Marc B. and Martin
W., but some questions were better put to specific defendants, he said. He seemed to be
suggesting that others might be better able to answer the kind of question the judge was
putting to Stphane J. (just as Stphane himself had, on the first day, been asked to help with a
point that a fellow defendant could not answer).
They went back and forth on that a little more, until the judge restated his position. He noted
the objections from the defence, but his mission was to clear away some of the bushes in this
forest so as to try to see more clearly. This case was particularly complicated and tangled and
It was for the court to decide how best to proceed, he said.
So the objections were noted and if they wanted to put more questions they could. The
defence lawyers resumed their seats.
Stphane J. meanwhile, had had time to reflect on the judges questions. He wanted to point
out that what the judge had been asking about was only part of what the ethics office did.
Agreed, said the judge: but it was part of the bigger picture.
But if you only go on that said Stphane.
I assure you, we have other documents, the judge replied.
(1) While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here
choose not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is
to wait until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice. And yes, there was a
Catholic priest who was also a Scientologist: more on that, perhaps, after the judgment is
handed down on March 11.

(2) Anyone declared a Suppressive Person in Scientology is cast out of the movement and
Scientologists in good standing cannot have any contact with them.
In a December 7, 1976 Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter (HCOPL) Leaving
and Leaves Hubbard specified that a staff member who failed to route out using the proper
channels should be automatically declared suppressive. You can also find it listed in
Hubbard's book, Introduction to Scientology Ethics (Chapter 7 in the "Supressive Acts"
section).
(3) Hubbards injunction to declare a person suppressive for seeking a refund is listed in a
December 23, 1968 policy letter (HCOPL), Suppressive Acts: Suppression of Scientology
and Scientologists". This policy letter forms part of Hubbards book Introduction to
Scientology Ethics (Chapter 7, in the Suppressive Acts section).
(4) I think the defence lawyer who intervened here was Matre Ines Wouters. While she did
not specify a text, she may have had in mind one of the precepts in Hubbards The Way to
Happiness, which reads: Dont do anything illegal.
Photo, La Coupole du Palais de Justice, Bruxelles by Michel Wal, Creative Commons licence

16. "Sell and deliver"

The judge in the Belgian trial of Scientology pressed a former

president of the Church there on the movement's sales tactics.
Judge Yves Rgimont had already questioned Stphane J.* on why it appeared to be so
difficult to leave Scientology. Now he turned to the Churchs sales tactics.
People had explained to him the use of the e-meter, the device used in Scientologys form of
counselling, he said. But what concerned him more was it price.
Back in the 1990s you could buy one for around 24,000 Belgian francs (600 euros), he noted:
but some former plaintiffs in the case had complained that they had been obliged to buy
models costing 200,000 Belgian francs (nearly 50,000 euros).

I never forced anyone to buy anything they didnt want, said Stphane. I never obliged
anyone to buy anything if they didnt want to.
And if they didnt have the money to buy something? asked the judge.
I would look at solutions, including taking out a loan if one was available," he replied.
And why not say to them, Look, everyone wants something, but
It is the decision of the person, said Stphane. And if the person said they didnt want a
loan, then he accepted that.
If you say to them You have got to this stage and you still have problems, said the judge.
If someone had started up the Bridge to Total Freedom and still has psychological problems,
he asked, would you not be saying to them that if they wanted to advance then they had to
take this course?
Technically, you dont say you have to take this loan," the judge continued. "But when you
put it like that, is there not still a pressure? Im sure that all the people in Scientology want to
progress, but there is a difference between the will and the means.
So is it not by titillating someone that you take this person unconsciously by the hand to
get them to pay for a service? the Judge Rgimont asked.
No, said Stphane. All they did was set out the possible options. The parishioner decides if
he wants to take the service, and if he has not got the money, we will help him find solutions.
It is the parishioner who decides what he wants to do, he insisted.
I am there to help people, and I know that the Bridge to Total Freedom is the solution, he
added. We are not in a society where everything is free, so when we have to discuss money,
we discuss money.
But as Mr. Hubbard says, the more people, the more money, Judge Rgimont replied.
He says the more people you get into Scientology the better society will be, said Stphane.
You and others have been saying that it is the progress of the person that counts, the judge
continued. Their progress up the Bridge to Total Freedom.
But when he looked at the instructions that Hubbard had left behind, he added, it was not that
that counted. He quoted from a policy letter written by Hubbard:
The only reason orgs exist is TO SELL AND DELIVER MATERIALS AND SERVICE TO THE
PUBLIC AND GET IN PUBLIC TO SELL AND DELIVER TO. THE OBJECT IS TOTALLY
FREED BEINGS! (1)
The last line is the important one, said Stphane.
Im sorry, the judge replied, exasperated, but the important stuff, you put at the top. The
only reason the orgs [Scientology centres, organisations] exist is to sell and provide materials
and services to the public, he repeated. That was the thrust of it, said the judge.

No, Stphane objected. There was not just one aspect. There was the broader aim of
Scientology. We are there to bring people up the Bridge, and to do that we have to sell books
and services to the public. The most important thing is that the public is up the Bridge as
quickly and correctly as possible.

The only aim is to get people up the Bridge," the defendant

insisted.
Judge Rgimont quoted another Hubbard policy letter:
[N]o org that doesnt sell books hard [sic] can long survive. This is the front line and its
neglect causes the later financial troubles. (2)
Mr. Hubbard says 25 books make a Scientologist, Stphane replied. So the more books you
sell the public, the better, he said.
The judge tried him with another Hubbard quote, this one about the importance of creating
more Field Staff Members, or FSMs: Scientologists who sell good and services to other
members, taking a commission on their sales.
Stphane did not see what the problem was: the more Field Staff members there were, the
more books would be sold, he said. And Scientologists needed advice on their way up the
Bridge.
In any case, said the judge: what was clear was that for a church to function properly it had to
bring in money. He cited another Hubbard policy letter that set out instructions on how to get
a student who was off lines no longer doing courses back on lines.
These are not documents that I invented, said the judge. These were not comments from the
investigating judge, the investigators, the prosecutors. These were internal Scientology
documents.
Perhaps I dont understand them it is entirely possible but me, when I see them, I have
trouble reading anything other than what is there. What then, the judge asked Stphane, was
the ultimate aim of the Bridge so far as he was concerned?
The only aim is to get people up the Bridge, Stphane replied. And so far as the Scientology
documents the judge had cited were concerned, he had not seen anything there where the law
was being broken, he added.
If you take it document by document you are perhaps right, said the judge. But if you take
it as a whole he added. The prosecutor was arguing that Scientology was a business, that it
was essentially about making money, he explained. The defence position was that this was
nonsense, the judge added.
He has the first word and you have the last, he said. But if what the prosecutor said was
true, then at that point the defendants had a problem.
Do you understand the importance I put on hearing what you have to say? the judge asked.
I have some elements of the puzzle, but perhaps I am missing a few.

And with that, the court adjourned for lunch.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
(1) This passage is from The Reason for Orgs, a Hubbard Communications Office Policy
Letter dated January 31, 1983.
(2) This passage is from Field Staff Members another Hubbard Communications Office
Policy Letter, this one dated March 26, 1965.
Palais de Justice, by unknown photographer; public domain via Wikimedia Commons.

17. Conflict Resolution

The judge in the Belgian trial of Scientology pushed a former

senior member to explain why the Church insisted on getting
involved in peoples private lives.
Judge Yves Rgimont had already questioned former president of the Church Stphane J.* on
why it appeared to be so difficult to leave Scientology and on the movements sales tactics.
Now he asked him about the e-meter (or electropsychometer), the device used in
Scientologys counselling sessions, to measure and evaluate peoples reactions.
The prices he had heard cited for the devices in the thousands of euros still seem to bother
him.

Stphane explained that the price of each model was a reflection of how precise, how accurate
it was. With a Mark V meter you can audit up to Clear, and if you want to go further you
have to have a Mark VI, he added.
It was like the difference between a Ferrari and a Volkswagen Beetle he said; one was
custom-built for an individual and the other was mass-produced for the general public.

The judge consulted some of the expert reports on the e-meter submitted to the court. One, at
least, had dismissed it as little more than a basic device for measuring electrical resistance.
The implication seemed to be that there was little justification for the price tag.
Stphane was not having any of that. The e-meter was a precision device for which
Scientology held the patent and which no one else could build, he said: and it was made to the
strict specifications of the Church.
The judge was puzzled when Stphane confirmed that one could solo-audit: how could an
auditor audit himself, he wanted to know? How did he answer the questions he was himself
asking? Stphane could not say: that level of auditing was not done in Belgium.
But he was clear on this point: Anyone who is a Scientologist and wants to go up the Bridge
will at some point need an e-meter to audit themselves.
Stphane acknowledged that he had not been earning much as a staffer: so how, the judge
wanted to know, had he been able to afford the substantial payments he had made for an emeter and for membership of the International Association of Scientologists (the IAS)?
Stphane repeated what he had said earlier about his wife having a job, but he also confirmed
that they had got themselves heavily into debt, something to which the judge had referred
earlier.
In all, they had ended up one million Belgian francs (nearly 100,000 euros) in the red. And of
that sum, he had paid 400,000 Belgian francs to the International Association of
Scientologists. (Judge Rgimont had already questioned defendants on why the IAS got so
much money.) (1)
The judge reviewed the sums of money he had spent on Scientology over the years. How did
you finance that? he asked. Because what is striking here is the way one invests in ones
spiritual programme; but there is a link between the spiritual programmes and the money
spent.
Did there not come a point when you said Stop?
That is one of the reasons I left the Church, said Stphane, referring to his decision to quit
staff. Because I was in an impossible position and I had to do something about it. But the
massive debts he had run up were not due to his 15 years in Scientology, he said, but because
his wife had lost her job.
One of Stphanes staff duties had actually been selling IAS membership to other
Scientologists. Judge Rgimont had already noted that Stphane was on something called the
Honor Roll, which he took to mean he had contributed a lot of money to the Church. Stphane
said it wasnt necessarily about how much money he had given. (2) Pressed by the judge
however, he elaborated.
When I convince someone to make a donation I receive a commission, and effectively, it
often happened that I would pay it to the IAS, because my aim was not to make money but to
help the IAS.

You picked a strange way to settle the conflict, the judge

remarked.
Now the judge returned to more sensitive matters.
He wanted to know more about a case he had already discussed with another defendant,
Bernadette P; that of Mme V., a woman in severe distress who had been refused Scientology
services by the Church.
The judge had been struck by the fact that Bernadette had pressed Mme V. for a signed
statement to the effect that her attempted suicide had had nothing to do with Scientology.
All this had happened in 1997, when Stphane had been president of the Church of
Scientology Belgium. He confirmed that he had been aware of the case at the time.
You knew that she was in bad shape? the judge asked.
But not to that point, Stphane replied.
The judge pressed him on Bernadette P.s bid to get the letter from Mme V. clearing
Scientology of any role in her suicide attempt.
"What was the point of that document? the judge asked, referring to the suicide memo that
Bernadette P. had tried to obtain.
It was to protect the Church if someone made a suicide attempt, said Stphane. It was
normal to get such a document to protect the Church, he added.
So had there been other such cases?
There had been cases of Scientologists who had made suicide attempts before they had joined
the Church, Stphane replied.
People who attempted suicide before entering Scientology? You had them sign a document
to say that it was nothing to do with that? The judge did not sound convinced.
He turned to another case, a Monsieur C. who had had a dispute with a Scientologist: he had
taken a loan and not respected the repayment terms.
Stphane had got involved even though Monsieur C. had already left the Church. As president
of the Church, he had written to him to say that he had a debt to pay off first and that he had
to pay by a certain date or he would be handled.
You picked a strange way to settle the conflict, if I may say so, the judge remarked. (And,
he added later, coming from someone who could not manage his own debts, that was a bit
rich.)
Stphane tried to explain. If his memory was correct, he said, it was the Church chaplain who
had got involved in that dispute he did not think he had signed the document to which the

judge was referring. But in any case, they had simply applied Scientologys ethics code to get
the person concerned to meet his financial obligations.
He changed his attitude and in the end he disappeared and we never heard any more from
him.
What bothered Judge Rgimont however was that the Church had felt the need to get involved
at all. It wasnt just the question of the debt, he said. The man's wife blamed Scientology for
having got him into this mess in the first place.
He was declared PTS a Potential Trouble Source because his wife had said she would
divorce him if he did not leave Scientology, the judge pointed out. One gets the impression
that anything that can hurt the image of Scientology, then no? That is not it?
I dont see what is wrong with that, Stphane protested. Monsieur C. gave a very bad
image of Scientology, he said.
He could have understood the judges objecting if they had been pressing him to get money
back for Scientology, but this was money owed to one of their parishioners, he added. And
this was someone who had borrowed money for uses totally outside the Church of
Scientology, he added.
This was interference in peoples private life, Judge Rgimont objected. And it was not as if
this was the only such example, he added.
The judge was just getting started.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment (due on March 11). It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
(1) For more on the International Association of Scientologists see the earlier court reports:
Money and Ethics, Pieces of the Scientology Puzzle and The IAS: funding Scientologys
Good Works.
(2) Stphane was right when he said that the Honor Roll was not necessarily about how much
money one paid: it can also be a reflection of how many members he recruited to the IAS. In
Scientology publications, Stphanes name is listed on the Senior Honor Roll in an official
Scientology publication. That means he recruited 100 new members for the IAS or
contributed to IAS expansion in some stellar fashion.
Photo, Bancs du Palais de Justice de Bruxelles by Mtty, published under a Creative
Commons licence.

18. Justice and Ethics

The judge in the Belgian trial of Scientology reduced one

defendant to tears as he pushed him to justify the Churchs
meddling in its members private lives.
Judge Rgimont had been questioning Stphane J.* for some time already when he began
pressing him to explain why Scientology insisted on getting involved in every aspect of its
members private lives.
Stphane had done his best with the first few cases, of which he had some personal
knowledge, but Judge Yves Rgimont kept supplying more examples. Now he cited a case in
which a couple doing courses had been told to break up.
Is that normal when the main aim of Scientology is to help people progress spiritually?
asked the judge. Why keep meddling in peoples private lives, and then keep saying You
have to do this or If you dont do this, then that,?... Or am I wrong?
As a Church we try to help people, said Stphane.
Up to a point, thats fine, the judge replied. But theres helping and theres insisting! Why
do you meddle so much in peoples lives? the judge asked again, somewhat exasperated
now.
The aim is to help people, Stphane said again, a little flustered. And 99 percent of the
time, everything goes well.
The judge was still not satisfied. Heres what I mean by meddling in private lives, he said.
And he raised the issue of Knowledge Reports; documents that Scientologists are required to
write denouncing any acts by other members that violate the Churchs ethics code.(1)
Judge Rgimont cited one particular Knowledge Report about two members of staff who had
gone on holiday together. It was not quite clear what their supposed offence was, but a report
had ended up in the womans ethics folder, a kind of disciplinary file Scientology keeps on
each member, listing any transgressions of the Churchs ethics code. (2) The judge named the
person concerned and Stphane was familiar with the case.

We are talking about peoples private lives, here, the judge pointed out.
You are quite right, said Stphane.
But it is in her ethics file! said the judge.
But that doesnt mean Stphane began.
What is it doing there? said the judge.
The person concerned had received a copy and the matter had been resolved, said Stphane.
You are saying that it shouldnt be there [in the ethics file] and you are right, he continued.
That was something the chaplain should have handled but the judge had moved on to
another case already.
As the judge laid out one example after another, Stphane did his best to field his questions.
These elements have been taken out of context, he said of another case, in which a couple
had been advised to separate. The man and his wife had been receiving marriage counselling,
he explained.
A kind of marriage counselling? said the judge. Scientology seemed to get involved in
every aspect of its members' lives, he noted: debt management, marriage counselling ... the
word emmerdeurs came up which can loosely be translated as pains-in-the-arse. Judge
Rgimont was working up a head of steam.
Why not just let them leave? he asked again. What bothers is me is this interfering in the
recesses of peoples private lives. Once they are in, they have to stay and you do everything
you can to ensure that they stay.
You try to get students back because they havent understood; members of staff, because
they have not respected the procedure, the judge continued. But there comes a time when
you have to stop.
When Stphane tried to explain one complaint by a former member by saying the person had
been annoyed at the time, the judge only became more irritated.
Why do you have to at all costs meddle in everything that concerns a person?! Why?
Why? Why? That is my question! If people dont want to be helped, well too bad for them,
he said.

The only thing that I wanted to do was to help people, he

said, in tears.
The judge ran through the charge sheet: fraud, extortion, illegal practice of medicine and
more So for you, this trial is complete nonsense? he asked.
Stphane was by now, struggling to maintain his composure. All the things I did, if they
were illegal it was my responsibility, he said. He paused, as the tears came to his eyes.

Take your time, Monsieur, said the judge, noting his distress. Youve got all the time you
need.
But Stphane was by now weeping unrestrainedly. It was a moment before he could continue.
For 17 years, the only thing that I wanted to do was to help people, he said.
The judge turned to the court clerk and had her make a formal note of Stphanes remarks.
Now it was the turn of the prosecutor, Christophe Caliman, to put his questions.
Can you continue? he asked Stphane.
Ill do my best, the defendant replied. But he was clearly still shaken. Caliman suggested a
pause might be advisable and so Judge Rgimont called a five-minute recess.
As it turned out, Stphane got plenty of time to recover his composure. When Caliman
produced a CD-ROM packed with Hubbards policy letters for the use of the court, the
ensuing legal arguments took up a good 20 minutes.
Several members of the defence team refused the copies he offered them: how were they
supposed to digest such a mass of documents at such short notice? The prosecutor insisted he
was only trying to help. These same documents were already scattered in the case files among
the documents seized when police had raided Scientology premises, he assured them. Not all
the defence lawyers were convinced, however.
The judge did not appear moved by the defence objections (I think perhaps we are making
something out of nothing he remarked), but they were duly noted by the clerk. Only then was
Caliman able to start questioning the defendant.
He started by saying that one thing that had struck him was the frequency with which
Scientologists were asked to write up their overts confess their sins especially when they
were under financial pressure. Why was that?
Had it never occurred to him, Caliman asked, that when people were in Ethics (being
disciplined) and under the threat of being disconnected (kicked out of Scientology and cut off
from any contact with members in good standing) they were effectively being unduly
pressured to submit overts, or confessions, that could sometimes contain very sensitive
material? Does that strike you as normal? What is your personal opinion? I know you will
say that Hubbard wrote it.
It was a long and convoluted question, like many put by the prosecutor. But Stphane got the
gist of it.
This is something we do very routinely, said Stphane, and we put it in the Ethics file, that
is all. A person who is in a Condition of Danger writes up his overts and withholds to try to
establish what is not going right in life, he added. (A Condition of Danger is a negative status
that an Ethics Officer in Scientology will assign to someone who is not doing their job
properly.)

So if you were working, said Stphane, and something was not going right, this was the
formula you applied to fix the problem. He himself had written his Overts and Withholds (Os
& Ws) at least once a month, he said and not necessarily because an Ethics Officer had
asked him to do it.
It still struck the prosecutor as as strange, however. He might want to discuss a sensitive issue
at work, said Caliman, but he would not expect his boss to tell him to write it up.

I never felt so bad in my life, said the prosecutor, quoting

one Scientologist's account in the case files.
Do you consider it normal, he continued, that Hubbard wrote that any person who refuses
to answer a question on an e-meter must be put in the hands of an Ethics Officer and put
before a Committee of Evidence with a summons? Do you find it normal that if someone
refuses to cooperate, that they can be subjected to discipline? (3)
When Stphane protested that the prosecutor was quoting documents out of context, Caliman
offered to read him the whole thing. The rest is worse, he assured him. And all these overts,
these often intimate, compromising documents, were in Scientologists Ethics folders, he
added.
But it is not the same thing, said Stphane. It is written in a particular situation. It is not
that I have a particular interpretation. You can ask anyone in Scientology they have all
written up their Overts and Withholds, and they understand that it is only going to be used to
help them advance spiritually.
Caliman consulted his papers and quoted a part of a statement from a Scientologist: They
ask me to write up my Overts and I feel like throwing up, he read. When you are an outside
observer and you read that,
I know that person, said Stphane. Ask them now. That was how she felt at the time,
but There were reasons for that kind of reaction, and Hubbard had talked about it, he
continued. There was a proper way to handle the situation so that when that same person was
asked to write up their Overts, they would do so with no problem.
Caliman went back to the case papers. I never felt so bad in my life, he said, quoting again
from the document in front of him. This passage made him think of someone who was in real
pain, he said.
But that is what they overcome during the process, said Stphane. That can happen during
the process. I dont write my Overts and Withholds because Im fine, but because there is
something I need to confront.
But dont you think it is even harder when there is an Ethics Officer on your back? asked
Caliman.
There are two things: Justice and Ethics, said Stphane. The Ethics Officer is there to help
the parishioner resolve a problem: he has all the Ethics technology to help the parishioner to
resolve the situation.

But if the parishioner continued to commit offences (faire nimporte quoi) then the Justice
element took over, he added. And that was only normal.
No, its not normal, said the prosecutor. As the judge said, is it really necessary to force
people to improve at whatever cost?
If someone comes into Scientology it is because they want to improve themselves, said
Stphane. And if that was so easy, there would not be any need for Scientology.
Here, Judge Rgimont stepped in again. But as I said earlier, one gets the impression once
someone has taken the decision to see what Scientology is, and has done a certain number of
courses and at some point has decided that it isnt for them one gets the impression that
once that threshold has been crossed, your mission is to do whatever it takes to get them back
on the right path, even if that is not what they want.
No, said Stphane. If someone really wants to stop then they can. And he cited the
example of one former member who had filed a complaint against Scientology before
returning to the fold.
And with that they were done.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment (due on March 11). It seems only fair to respect that practice.
(1) Knowledge Reports Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, July 22, 1982.
Critics, including former members, denounce Knowledge Reports for the way they say they
are used to control Scientologists.
(2) Earlier, one defendant had insisted that the judge had the wrong idea about ethics files:
that they also listed Scientologists meritorious conduct: see Scientologys Gentle Ethics.
(3) Refusing an e-meter check is listed as a misdemeanour in Scientologys, which puts it at
two on a scale of four on Scientologys list of offences (with four the most serious). Offenses
& Penalties: HCO Policy Letter, March 7, 1965.
Photo of the Palais de Justice, Brussels, by Romainberth under a Creative Commons licence

19. Fighting the good fight

The prosecution case against Scientology is like blaming a

fireman for water damage, one defendant told the Belgian trial
of the Church.
The next man up might have been forgiven for being a little apprehensive. The previous
defendant after all, had been reduced to tears at one point by Judge Rgimonts close
questioning. There was no trace of nerves however, from Marc B.*
At 84 years old, he was the oldest of the 12 individual defendants on trial in Brussels. One of
the 11 who attended the proceedings a 12th man, based in France, did not attend due to ill
health he never missed a session.
More than once during the trial, defence lawyers referred to Marc B. as le sage: he was
considered the wise man in the community of Scientologists gathered in court. His fellow
defendants also appeared to treat him with a degree of respect, deference even, that was not
just due to his age.
He was always impeccably turned out and while the attention of some of his colleagues
sometimes wandered, Marc B. followed the proceedings attentively throughout.
And while his lawyer, Matre Quentin Wauters, regularly checked with his client during
recesses to make sure he was holding up to the rigours of the long, court sessions, he never
appeared to have any complaints.
So when Judge Yves Rgiment called him to give his testimony, he showed no signs of
apprehensiveness: indeed, he seemed to relish the prospect of finally having his say.
Some of the others on trial had struggled to do more than offer the same stock phrases in
response to the judges more pointed questions: there was a lot of talk, for example, of some
of the more problematic documents the judge quoted having been taken out of context.
Whatever the merits of the argument, it did not gain much from being repeated in much the
same fashion by successive defendants.

Marc B.s answers were, inevitably, along similar lines, but he seemed to do a better job of
presenting his case. He listened carefully, spoke clearly and offered a defence of his church
that went further than that of his colleagues.
Judge Rgimont started by asking him about his position in Scientology in the mid-1990s, the
period covered by the charges. I have heard of the Sea Organization, he said. What was
your role? What is the Sea Org and its role?
Marc B. took his time. He decided, after all, to take the seat he had initially declined. He
cleared his throat discreetly and he began speaking.
He had arrived in Belgium in 1996, he said, but before that he had served in Scientologys Sea
Organization until his retirement in 1993. Explaining his decision to join the Sea Org, he said
simply: I decided to devote my life to what was most important to me. The Sea
Organization, he said, was a fraternal religious organisation in which members devote all
their life to Scientology.
And how was it different from other parts of the Church, the judge asked?
It is a slightly different order in that the Sea Organization is responsible for the higher levels
of Scientology, he explained. And if he said that, he added, it was because he had heard a lot
of things over the past few days of the trial He didnt finish his phrase, but it was clear he
thought that the previous exchanges had muddied the waters and he was keen to set the record
straight. He wanted, he said, to talk about the true aims of Scientology.
Scientology is a religion in which Scientologists find their salvation and it is that which one
should put to the fore in this affair, he said. Dismissing the prosecution case against the
Church of Scientology in Belgium, he said: It is like blaming a fireman for water damage.

In Germany, it was discrimination, pure and simple, said

Marc B.
Marc B. explained that he had been in the United States in the mid-1990s when he began to
hear about what was happening in Europe. In Germany, children were being sent home from
school because they were Scientologists, he said. One local authority had even tried to force
people people to sign documents that they had not done Scientology courses, a so-called filter
that the Church denounced as an attack on their religious freedom. (1)
At that point I thought no, oh no because part of my family died in the 1940s, said Marc
B., referring to the the Holocaust. (2)
You mention Germany and filters, said the judge. Is there not some kind of filter for
people who either want to enter Scientology or leave Scientology? Scientologists also have
people sign a certain number of things in documents.
I can understand what you say about discrimination, he added, but can we also say from
another point of view, the prosecutors, that in Scientology they also make people sign
things?

These things are completely different, Marc B. replied. In Germany, it was discrimination,
pure and simple. Scientology had subsequently won lawsuits on the question that had
recognised Scientology as a religion and not as a commercial operation, as some German
officials had insisting on characterising it. (3)
As for the documents in Scientology, he said: Any organisation needs a certain amount of
administration.
You speak of discrimination, said the judge. We spoke about that yesterday. We have
spoken a lot about the aims of Scientology to help people up the Bridge. You talk of
discrimination, but is there not the same discrimination when you say to someone who has
psychological problems, You cant come in.
This may have been a reference to the case of Mme V., discussed earlier, when a woman who
was in a state of distress, possibly due to postnatal depression, was refused Scientology
processing. The judge had discussed it with Bernadette P., the woman who had turned her
away, and with the president of the Church of Scientology at the time in question, Stphane J.
Or he may have been referring to a more general Scientology policy banning the organisation
from auditing people who had already received extensive psychiatric treatment. In any case,
Marc B. did not accept his point. (4)
Not at all, he said. We never close the door. They can still take part in religious services.
As a minister I carry out marriages, funerals, he added. People denied the therapeutic side of
Scientologys teachings (such as auditing) could still do co-religious courses, he said.
There are multiple possibilities.
And you dont have to pay, necessarily? the judge asked.
Not at all, Marc B. replied. The door is always open just as my door is, as a minister.
So the limitation for psychiatric [cases] is for the courses they can follow? For the rest,
anyone else can have access to events, and so on? Judge Rgimont asked.
If someone comes in who is visibly deranged, it is certain the Church is going to look
closely, said Marc B. But there are people who suffer from different problems who come to
the Church and stay there.
The judge asked him to continue with his account of what had brought him back from the
United States and Marc B. explained that he had become a member of
Scientology's European Office for Human Rights. This was a precursor to the Church's
European Office for Public Affairs and Human Rights, which along with the Church of
Scientology Belgium, was one of the two organisations targeted in the indictment.

The first reaction is You are a Scientologist? and they

look at you sideways. So my role was to reach out and
communicate.
Questioned by the judge, Marc B. was clear that even if at one point he was working out of
Church of Scientology premises in Brussels, the human rights office and its successor were

both entirely separate, independent entities from the Church. In the context of the trial, given
that both the Church and the rights office faced charges, that was an important point. (5)
So there was no link between the two entities? the judge asked again.
No, no, no, not at all, Marc B. replied. There was the Church of Scientology Belgium, and
then there was the rights office, which operated at a European level.
Asked about his position relative to Martin W., another defendant who had worked in the
European Office for Public Affairs and Human Rights, Martin B. explained that he worked
under him. (Martin W. had yet to be questioned by the judge.)
And if he returned from the United States in a response to what he saw as the deteriorating
rights situation in Europe, what part did his new role in Belgium play in that problem, the
judge asked? What were you going to do to make things better?
His job, said Marc B., was director of interreligious affairs and as such he had many
contacts with other religious leaders.
So you had nothing to do with what we have been discussing regarding the Church of
Scientology Belgium, etc you are totally independent? the judge asked again, just to be
sure.
Every Scientology org is responsible for its own running, Marc B. replied. What I did was
contact other religions to show them what Scientology was and to influence on the European
level.
So you did a bit more than Monsieur A., said the judge, referring to a defendant he had
already questioned, Fabio A. One of your objectives is to promote Scientology, he pointed
out.
Marc B. preferred to nuance it. You could say that, but it is more specifically that there is
contact with religious leaders to show them what Scientology is. If they learn about it through
the media they get a completely distorted picture. The public is completely ignorant about
what Scientology is: they learn about it by hearsay. My job was to go to people and help them
understand what Scientology is and also to mobilise them on the theme of religious
freedom.
The judge was curious about this. You consider yourself a religion, fine, he said. But how
did he go about approaching different religions, such as say Catholics and Muslims? Can you
be Catholic or Muslim and a Scientologist at the same time? he asked. When you looked at
the Middle East, you did not get the impression that the different religions walked hand in
hand, the judge remarked.
Scientology was still just a baby compared to a religion like Catholicism, Marc B. conceded.
But when I got to know Scientology, it immediately helped me in my life and when you
find something that is good for you, you want to share it, and so I started to give courses in
Paris.

Now, he said, he was a visiting lecturer at a college in Anvers (Antwerp), a Catholic

establishment, contributing to a course on comparative religion, where his presentations were
appreciated, He was happy to work with them to promote freedom or religion, he added.
Part of his work, he said, had been simply to dispel the misconceptions about Scientology.
The first reaction is You are a Scientologist? and they look at you sideways. So my role
was to reach out and communicate.
Having established Marc B.s role in Scientology at the time in question, Judge Rgimont
stepped up a gear. As he had with the other defendants, he started presenting him with some
of the more problematic cases that had brought the case to court.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment (due on March 11). It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Photo, Galeries de faade du palais de Justice de Bruxelles, by Jean Housen, Creative
Commons Licence.

See here for a complete list of coverage so far.

(1) This appears to be a reference to a move by Hamburg officials to filter companies and
individuals they did business with: before they signed contracts with outside businesses, they
wanted to ensure that they had no links with Scientology. The Church there successfully
challenged the practice in the courts, arguing that it was violating the city authoritys duty to
remain neutral on religious questions. For a Scientology account of the affair, see this piece
from its Freedom magazine. Here you will find the text of a leaflet the German embassy in
Washington issued to counter some of the criticism levelled against Germany for its treatment
of Scientologists at the time.
Ursula Caberta, who for years ran Hamburgs task force monitoring Scientology, told me that
the so-called sect filter was not so much about stopping people having contact with
Scientology but getting assurances that a company was not using the technology of L. Ron
Hubbard. For the business world, it was important, she said, because they wanted to keep
those ideas out of their operations. The mobilisation of the German authorities was in
response to the activities of WISE, the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises, to import
Hubbards teachings into the German business world.
She confirmed that Scientology did win one case in Germany, but added that they had lost a
case that they tried to bring against her in Florida (personal communication).
(2) In an open letter to the then German chancellor Helmut Kohl drawn up in December 1996,
Scientology drew parallels between his governments treatment of Scientology and the Nazis
treatment of the Jews in the 1930s. It was signed by a number of American celebrities
including Dustin Hoffman, Goldie Hawn and Oliver Stone. Published in the International
Herald Tribune and the New York Times, it provoked an angry exchange of letters at the
Times and a protest from journalists at the Tribune, who took out their own ad to disown the
full-page ad their paper had run.

(3) The Germany embassy leaflet quotes a judgment that ruled precisely the opposite: that
Scientology, at least as it operated in Hamburg, ...was not a religious congregation, but
clearly a commercial enterprise.
(4) The judge may have been thinking in broader terms, of a Scientology policy that made it
clear that its teachings were to make the capable more capable, but not to cure the mentally
disturbed. In a 1976 policy letter, L. Ron Hubbard declared it a high crime for a Scientology
org to treat anyone who has ...an extensive institutional history which includes heavy drugs,
shocks of various kinds and/or so-called psychiatric brain operations.
Later in the same document, he explained: Doctors are too often careless and incompetent,
psychiatrists are simply outright murderers. The solution is not to pick up their pieces for
them but to demand medical doctors become competent and to abolish psychiatry and
psychiatrists as well as psychologists and other infamous Nazi criminal outgrowths." (Illegal
PCs, Acceptance of, High Crime PL, December 6, 1976.)
(5) While European Office for Public Affairs and Human Rights was on the initial indictment,
prosecutor Christophe Caliman dropped the charges against it during his closing arguments
later in the trial. By the end of the proceedings, the only organisation left was the Church of
Scientology Belgium, accused of criminal organisation: Caliman called for its dissolution.
(For more see Shut Down Scientology in Belgium: prosecutor)

20. Apostates

Some of those who filed complaints against Scientology are

apostates, disillusioned former members determined to burn
what they once adored, a defendant told the Belgian trial of
the Church.
Judge Yves Rgimont had started by letting Marc B. explain his role in Scientology when he
worked at the Brussels human rights office. Having established that, he was ready to step up a
gear and present him with some of the more problematic cases presented to the court.

So what were his thoughts on those cases he had already set out to his fellow defendants, the
judge wanted to know? Judge Rgimont had been left with the distinct impression that once
you entered Scientology you were taken in hand, to the extent that you simply had to reach
the next level, at any cost, whether you yourself wanted to or not.
When you look in as an outsider, the judge added. He did not finish his sentence, but he
had made his position clear earlier that day: why, he had asked repeatedly, did Scientology
insist on meddling in peoples private lives?
What do you say? the judge wanted to know. You dont understand?
Matre Pascal Vanderveeren, the lawyer for the Church of Scientology Belgium, did not look
best pleased at this line of questioning. That was perhaps understandable given how some of
the previous defendants had struggled to answer the points the judge had put to them. (More
than one had been reduced to tears.) Marc B. however, seemed happy to answer.
It was very difficult for the court, he said. The judge could only deal with what was in front of
him, which was the prosecution case, even if he was not obliged to take the same line. Im
not a specialist in law, he continued, but if I look at the people who have made these
complaints, what do I see? I see that they were people in the church.
Whether their complaints were justified or not was another matter, he added. For as soon as
you had someone who had left a movement, you were dealing with an apostate, and evidently
there was a tendency to burn what they had once adored, he said. (1)
But if you talk to the Scientology community, you get a completely different story. They will
tell you I went to see the Ethics Officers and they helped me, he added. (Ethics officers in
Scientology deal with contraventions of the churchs rules.) But I understand that you put
this question, he added.
The judge did not seem satisfied. Could he not understand that a certain number of people
were not just saying that they did not believe in Scientology any more, but that they had been
swindled, he asked?
I dont know what happened to these people, said Marc B. Cest un sujet
merveilleusement vain, divers et ondoyant que lhomme, he added, quoting Montaigne
(Man to be sure, is a wonderfully vain, diverse and fickle subject). (2) But that does not
shake my attachment to Scientology, he said. I and my wife were given so much by
Scientology.
Perhaps some mistakes had been made, he conceded: but we were dealing with human nature

I was broken, physically and psychologically, one former

member had told investigators...
Judge Rgimont referred to his papers and set out another case, one he had not previously
presented to the court. This concerned a former Scientologist, a Monsieur P., who had been an
active member between 1980 and 1987.

He had told investigators that there had come a point, around 1986, when he had realized that
the Church of Scientology Belgium was under constant pressure from the mother org in Los
Angeles to get people to buy courses and books but mainly books, because that money
would then be paid up to Scientologys Denmark-based publishing wing, New Era
Publications.
The more senior orgs wanted more books than services to be sold, so more money would be
channeled up to them, Monsieur P. had told investigators. It got to the point that money
originally paid to buy services would be diverted for the purchase of books, to maximise the
sums moved abroad. But reassigning money from services to books required the consent of
the parishioner.
Staff at the Brussels org were put under constant pressure to get parishioners to modify their
original purchases accordingly. We were obliged to convince them to change the destination
of the money; to get them to buy books, Monsieur P. had explained. So they passed on that
pressure to their clients until they complied.
Even some of the money allocated to buy services would be paid up to the more senior
Copenhagen or Los Angeles organisations. The rest went towards keeping the lights on at the
Brussels org.
Monsieur P. had told investigators that once he had realized what was happening, he had
asked for an investigation a committee of evidence, in Scientology parlance. This was his
way of denouncing the practice through the approved Scientology channels.
Instead what had happened was a team of senior Scientologists had arrived from Copenhagen
to replace him and ordered him to Copenhagen for ethics handling. In short then, he was to
be disciplined for having blown the whistle.
Monsieur P. refused to go, preferring to quit his staff post before his five-year term was up:
that meant that the Church expected him to pay for all the Scientology services he had
received free while a staffer. He preferred to break all contact with them.
Soon afterwards he received a document saying he had been declared a Suppressive Person
an enemy of Scientology the harshest sanction that can be applied to any Scientologist. (3)
I was broken physically and psychologically, Monsieur P. had told investigators. Being
declared suppressive, being excluded from Scientology, had left him feeling like he was less
than nothing, that it was the ultimate punishment, It had taken him three years to recover, he
said.
Judge Rgimont looked up from his file at Marc B. This man was ill and he was excluded,
he said. Here was a senior member of staff ...who notices something wrong in the Church in
Belgium and who reports it to his superiors.
We are there to help people, said the judge, reminding Marc B. of what his fellow
defendants had been repeating throughout the trial. But how had Monsieur P. been treated?
He had been ordered off to Copenhagen for ethics handling.

I wasnt there, said Marc B. I dont know what he did or didnt do. Was he honest or
dishonest? Did he behave badly? I have a more than 50-years career in Scientology, and I
have only seen people who were treated correctly, with just a few exceptions, here or there.
You have before you a community made of people who are honest and who want to help
people. So if there is a Monsieur P., well, I dont know what he did, this man.
Scientology has brought so much to me as a spiritual being, and that is no small thing as an
immortal, spiritual being, he continued. So put things in context.
As for this Monsieur P., he added: He did what he did,... and in any case, I dont think that
the Church of Scientology can be tainted with this because this is something for him to sort
out.
So if I understand correctly, it is partly his fault, said the judge.
Yes, said Marc B.

If a person wants to leave, they can, the defendant insisted

But this is not the only example in the file, said the judge. Perhaps hundreds of members
are very happy, he said. But are we not in a system in which once someone becomes a bit
difficult you have to do everything to get them to change their opinion, or punish them or
exclude them?
Since we are talking about systems, said Marc B., the objectives of Scientology are very
clear that people acquire a sense of spiritual plenitude.
Scientologists are responsible people, he added. You only had to look at what they did in
society: their campaigns against drugs, for human rights, their humanitarian work.
Everything in Scientology goes to helping others.
We have spoken a lot about ethics, he continued. Every Scientologist understands very
quickly that if they do not conduct themselves in a moral way, they cannot progress in
Scientology and so in Scientology that is what characterises the group. Mutual aid; helping
others and personally, that is my main aim, to advance my religion for the salvation of
souls.
When the judge returned to the question of how hard it seemed to be to walk away from
Scientology, Marc B. insisted. Once someone says No, its no.
Pressed on this point, he added: We consider people not only by their body but as immortal
spiritual beings. If you see people that way, that gives you a sense of responsibility and so if
someone decides to leave, you will do everything you can to persuade them that there is a
path in Scientology.
But those who want to, stay, and those who dont, dont. Hubbard, he added, says clearly,
if a person wants to leave, let them leave.

But clearly that is not the case, Judge Rgimont objected. From everything that he and the
others had said, it was clear that they believed that they had something that could save people,
he said. But should you save people even when they dont want to be saved?
If they punished someone, it was for their own good: he got that. But why did they do
absolutely everything they could to persuade a dissenter that they were wrong and
Scientology was right?
That is not what we want to do, said Marc B. If a person wants to leave, they can and in
any case, you can never keep someone against their will. Never.
The judge suggested that Scientologys ferocious efforts (acharnement) in trying to talk
people out of leaving the Church might, in the end, be counterproductive. Might they not have
had fewer problems, fewer complaints from unhappy people, if they had not persisted in
trying to convince people to stay?
Is it not that people are so disgusted that they have to say Thats enough, look what they
have done to me!? After all, that was just what Monsieur P. had ended up doing, he pointed
out.
No, no, said Marc B. It has happened to me that unhappy people came to me and we have
talked, and some people stayed and some people left But if a person has come to
Scientology and leaves, we have a responsibility to find out what went wrong and I dont
think there is a single religion that would let people leave, just like that. We have a
responsibility.
That is normal, said the judge. But if after all that, they still want to leave, do you really
have to insist that they stay?
Perhaps Im missing something, but I understand the reaction, Bon Dieu! Bon sang! Do you
absolutely have to impose your vision of the Church?!.
I understand what you are saying, said Marc B. But these accounts he was drawing on were
from the prosecutors file. In fact, if people want to leave, they can.
Saint Remy baptising Clovis, from the Muse de Picardie in Amiens. Photo by Pethrus
under a Creative Commons licence.
See here for a complete list of coverage so far.
(1) This is appears to be a reference to a well-known account of the 5th-century baptism of the
Frankish king Clovis into the Catholic faith. Courbe la tte, fier Sicambre, adore ce que tu as
brl, brle ce que tu as ador. (Bow your head, proud Sicambri, adore what you have
burned, burn what you have adored.)
So far as the plaintiffs to whom Marc B. was referring are concerned, they all either settled
with Scientology or withdrew from the case before it came to trial. But the prosecutor was
still able to use what they told investigators to build a criminal case.
2) Im not sure if he quoted this full passage, but it runs: Certes, c'est un sujet merveilleusement
vain, divers et ondoyant, que l'homme. Il est malais d'y fonder jugement constant et uniforme.

(Man, to be sure, is a wonderfully vain, diverse and fickle subject, on whom it is hard to form any
fixed and uniform judgment.) From Montaignes Essais (1595).
(3) Members in good standing have to disconnect with anyone declared suppressive, which
means they must have no further contact, or risk being themselves declared suppressive and in
turn excluded.

21. Scientology's Spiritual Mission

If you focus on Scientologys need for money you completely

miss the spiritual side of the Church, a defendant argued at the
Belgian trial of the movement.
Having questioned Marc B. on his role in Scientology and tackled him with some of the more
problematic cases in the prosecutors files, Judge Rgimont changed tack.
Did you take an interest in how the Church of Scientology Belgium ran itself? (Marc B. had
worked in Scientologys human rights office, a separate body.)
He said only that he had been aware that the church had at one point had trouble paying its
bills and so made some inquiries. But apart from his standing as a Scientology minister, he
had no authority over the CoS Belgium, so he had just notified the appropriate people to get
the situation resolved.
But he had carried out his own investigation to save the Church of Scientology Belgium, the
judge asked? Absolutely. It was my duty as a minister. If I hadnt done that I couldnt have
looked myself in the mirror.
The judge consulted his file. But he had also got involved in Mme V.s case, he noted.
Judge Rgimont had already raised this matter with two other defendants. This was a woman
who, when she was in a state of extreme psychological distress, had been refused Scientology
counselling. Scientologists had even tried to get her to sign a memo discharging them of any
responsibility for a suicide attempt that she had made. (1)

Marc B. explained that the husband of Mme V. had come to him and told him about his wifes
problems. He had made it clear that if his wifes problems were physical, then the first thing
to do was to take her to a doctor.
The judge consulted his files: it was rather more than that, he said.
His duty as a minister, said Marc B., had been to warn the Church hierarchy that something
was not right and that they should sort it out. He couldnt remember the details of what he had
said at the time, but it had been to the effect that the situation was prejudicial to the people
involved and to the Church.
But what about that letter discharging Scientology of any responsibility for Madame V.s
suicide attempt, the judge asked? And we found a document in which you say, One never
knows; that could be useful. Just how would it be useful?
I dont know, said Marc B. I dont remember. Is that not a reference to the incident in
Lyon? he asked a reference to the suicide of a French Scientologist, which led to a court
case and the 1996 conviction of one senior Scientology official for manslaughter. (2) All he
had been trying to do, said Marc B., was head off a situation like the one that had happened in
France.
He had simply done his duty as a minister of Scientology to alert the relevant people to the
situation developing in Brussels. You wont find anything else in this file, he assured the
judge.

The impression I have, said the judge, Its really that the
parishioners are children who need to be surrounded at all
times, on all points.
The judge asked about the role of the Medical Liaison Officer (MLO) in Scientology. He was
assured that it was simply someone who liaised with the medical services, when required.
In answer to a direct question from the judge, he said that the MLO did not decide if someone
really needed to go for medical treatment. (This was important because if the person
concerned was not qualified, that might have been construed as the illegal practice of
medicine, one of the offences listed in the indictment.)
He related an anecdote about the great job an MLO had done for him when he had been
admitted to hospital, but the judge still did not seem entirely satisfied. If someone was ill, he
said, he did not need an MLO to tell them that. And as far as taking care of the patient until
they got to the hospital, was that not what ambulance workers did?
Its nothing to do with that, said Marc B. He [the MLO] is there to make sure everything
goes well until the medical staff arrive.
But the judge still wasnt satisfied.
Once again with these explanations, the impression I have, its really that the parishioners
are children who need to be surrounded at all times, on all points. When he went to the
doctor, he remarked, he didnt need an MLO.

Well, said Marc B. all he could say was that he had been happy to have one take care of him
when the need arose. Chapeau, merci! (Hats off! Thank you!)
Judge Rgimont turned to another file; another case in which Marc B. had intervened. He
named the man in the question.
I must have met him somewhere, Marc B. replied, a little vaguely.
The judge tried to refresh his memory. We have analysed his ethics file and we have found a
document in which you intimate that he must present himself because he has not paid his
bill and if he does not, he will be declared Suppressive.
Marc B.s name was also on a non-enturbulation order; a Scientology document ordering
him to stop making trouble.
Marc B. apologised if he was repeating himself, but ...we have been talking about money; we
have not talked about one fundamental thing in the Church, which is the spirituality.
He spoke again of his role in the Sea Org; of everything Scientology had done for him
personally; of the importance of the spiritual side of the Church, how leaps in consciousness
led to a higher spirituality. But the court did not seem interested in any of this.
Instead, he said, the court had cited a document underlining the need for Scientology orgs to
make money. But he said, That is just one page from 10,000 pages of documents, from
administrative documents.
It was something that was just one part of an ensemble, he said, but ...the overall aim is to
ensure that people progress spiritually. Hubbard had created his administrative system to that
end only, he insisted. This passage that the judge had cited on selling was just one document
among thousands.

But it says you have to sell, sell, sell! said the judge
Earlier, Judge Rgimont had quoted another defendant, Stphane J., with a 1983 policy letter
in which Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard wrote.
The only reason orgs exist is TO SELL AND DELIVER MATERIALS AND SERVICE TO THE
PUBLIC AND GET IN PUBLIC TO SELL AND DELIVER TO. THE OBJECT IS TOTALLY
FREED BEINGS! (3)
But it says you have to sell, sell, sell! said the judge. It might be an exceptional page from
Hubbards oeuvre, he remarked: But it means what it means.
The question then, was why Hubbard had written it, said Marc B. Scientologists feel they are
on a mission to advance peoples spiritual progress. If we dont have money, we cant pay for
our excellent lawyers, pay our bills, etc and help people up the Bridge [Scientologys
spiritual Bridge to Total Freedom].
But if you focus on the money you completely miss the main point.
Judge Rgimont had his clerk make a formal note of that.

And it is the same for the IAS, added Marc, referring to the International Association of
Scientologists. More than once already during the trial, the judge had noted it took in
remarkable sums of money from its members. (4) But the IAS, Marc B. argued, funded
Scientologys social programmes around the world.
The judge had that formally noted too.
Quentin Wauters, Marc B.s lawyer, stepped in with a question: If Scientology was
subsidised, would you have to sell books? he asked, clearly an allusion to the fact that, unlike
some more mainstream churches in Belgium, Scientology received no state funding.
Obviously, said Marc B., if they were publicly subsidized at the right level, they wouldnt
have to sell them.
And, Matre Wauters continued, did the International Association of Scientologists accept
non-Scientologists as members? Yes, of course, his client replied and indeed there were
some.
And as someone who himself was teaching on a comparative religion course, could he tell the
court if there were other religions that got involved in the private lives of their members?
Certainly, Marc B. replied: there was Canon law in Catholicism and both Buddhism and Islam
had their equivalents. The behaviour of people in different people is surrounded by canons.
From that, Judge Rgimont concluded that the ethics code set out by Church founder Hubbard
played that canonical role in Scientology.
His questioning over, Marc B. returned to his place on the front bench of the court. As soon as
the judge had adjourned the days hearings, several of his fellow defendants came over to
congratulate him.
See here for earlier trial coverage.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment (due on March 11). It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Picture: Sunset at Porto Covo, west coast of Portugal, by Alvesgaspar, published under a
GNU Free Documentation License

(1) See both The Suicide Memo and Conflict Resolution at this site.
(2) In 1988, in Lyon, southeast France, Scientologist Patrice Vic had jumped to his death from
his block of flats, unable to cope with the pressure to borrow more money for the next set of
Scientology courses. In 1996, the head of the Lyon org was convicted of manslaughter
(homicide involontaire) for having contributed to Vics suicide. For more on this, see Lucy
Morgans February 8, 1998 report for the St. Petersburg Times: Scientology got blame for
French suicide.

(3) From The Reason for Orgs, a Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter dated January
31, 1983. For more details, see Sell and deliver from earlier in the coverage.
(4) See for example, The IAS: funding Scientologys good works, from earlier in the
coverage.

22. The Man from OSA

Scientologys Office of Special Affairs (OSA) is not the

Churchs security service, a defendant told a Belgian court.
Englishman Martin W. opened the fourth day of the trial. He was one of the more high-profile
Scientologists, having served as director of Scientologys Public Affairs and Human Rights
Office in Brussels.*
While it was clear that he understood some of what was being said in French, he had the
assistance of an interpreter throughout the trial and preferred to address the court in English.
Martin was dressed a suit and tie, looking for all the world like a middle-ranking executive in
some anonymous business. He was not quite as eloquent as his predecessor on the stand, 84year-old Marc B., whom some of the lawyers referred to as Le Sage (the Wise Man).
It was not so much that he was less articulate, but that he spent rather more time on the
defensive. And the way questioning progressed over three hours or so he was on the stand did
nothing to set him at his ease.
At times, his exasperation came through in the rather pedantic way he answered some
questions rather like an weary school teacher explaining a lesson to a particularly
recalcitrant class. And by the time the prosecutor got to put his questions, it was clear that his
patience had worn thin.
But Judge Yves Rgimont started with the easier questions, as he had with all the other
defendants. He asked him first to explain his background in Scientology.

Martin, now 63, explained that he had got involved when he was about 19 years old by doing
some of the basic courses. The first time around he had never actually completed them. But
while he drifted away for about six months, during that time he read a few books. And I
found something in Scientology.
At the time, he said, he very much wanted to improve society, ...to improve conditions for
everybody. I was very much looking for answers to questions big questions, like Why am I
here?, What is God? What is infinity?; big, religious questions.
I was reading the Bible, I was interested in Buddhism and it was around the same time that I
came across Scientology.
And you found in Scientology what you were looking for? asked the judge.
Very much, he replied. Then, after two years studying Scientology, he decided to join staff,
starting out at Scientologys centre at Saint Hill, East Grinstead, in the south of England,
where he stayed until 1989. From there, he went to the French church for a year and a half.
It wasnt easy there for me because of the language, he continued. But at the same time I
became aware of the growing importance of Europe, because of all the investments and all the
things that were happening there, because at the time the European Union wasnt even called
the European Union then: it was developing.
The Berlin Wall had just fallen and there was a lot of change and it became apparent that the
Church needed a kind of European representative to explain its activities.
But didnt something like that already exist? asked Judge Rgimont. There was the
headquarters in Denmark, he pointed out. He was referring to the Churchs Copenhagen
base: what is known in Scientology as Advanced Organization/Saint Hill Europe (AOSH EU,
also known as AOSH DK).
That was different, Martin explained. The European headquarters in Denmark was an
ecclesiastical guidance [centre] for the churches. There were no on-the-ground activities
where the Church would be represented in European institutions.
So Copenhagen gave instructions to other churches, the judge asked? The role of Copenhagen
had come up more than once during the trial, so this was no idle question. (1)
Not at all, Martin replied. So the judge tried again.
What I understood is the international headquarters is in the United States and the European
headquarters is responsible for local churches or am I wrong? As he understood it,
Denmark was on a higher step of the ladder than the local churches scattered across Europe.
That much was correct, said Martin. The office I founded had the purposes of representing
the Church. Obviously I was not in a position to do that from Copenhagen. He had also
commuted a lot between Brussels and Strasbourg, eastern France, where the European
Parliament sits.
So you founded this office said the judge.

Exactly, Martin replied.

Earlier, Judge Rgimont reminded him, he had questioned another defendant, Fabio A., a
former director of the Human Rights and Public Affairs Office, who had explained to him that
his role was to plan Scientologys activities at the European level.
Martin explained that in fact there had been two human rights offices: one that had started in
1990 and had operated in 2003, which was more focussed on human rights and current affairs;
then there was a second incarnation, run by Fabio A. with a broader remit. He had continued
his human rights activities in the new-look organisation, he added, with more of an emphasis
on Scientologys social welfare activities.

We have the impression that the OSA was a kind of security

service for the Church, the judge said. Am I wrong?
The file suggests that you were a leader of the OSA. Is that right? Judge Rgimont asked.
It depends on what you mean by that, said Martin. I had no function in the Belgian
Church. There was OSA, which is the department in the Church which deals with external
affairs just to be clear.
Each church has an arm that deals with external affairs, public relations, legal matters
things like that. He had filled that role for the Church of Scientology Europe, he said.
Martin was making an important distinction because, even if at that point the European Office
for Public Affairs and Human Rights was still on the charge sheet, so too was the Church of
Scientology Belgium. (2) It was important then for Martin W. to make it clear that he had no
executive role in the activities the Belgian Church.
The judge got that point: he had ran the OSA at the European level, not OSA Belgium.
So in the hierarchy, you were superior to the OSA leaders in Belgium? he asked.
No, Martin replied.
What is the OSA for? the judge asked.
The role of the OSA is to deal with external affairs for the Church, public relations,
government relations, social reform activities, research, information things like that.
What kind of research? What kind of information? the judge asked.
Things to do with drugs in society,social reform campaigns, that kind of thing, Martin replied.
Only along these lines? the judge asked. Or research into people, institutions that might
present a danger to the Church of Scientology?
Martin did not want to put it that way. I was looking to understand what the European Union
was what role we could play in it.

Of course there might have been other areas of research, he conceded: such as on negative
articles on the Church People who attack the Church. So information would be collected
from public information sources. But I would say a lot of that was more a national function,
because there werent a lot of negative articles at the European level.
His work also included liaison with other national Scientology churches but not in any
sense that I was their superior, he added.
That was really the point of the question, said the judge, because the court had before it a
certain amount of evidence that the OSAs role was a bit more than that.
We have the impression that the OSA was a kind of security service for the Church, the
judge said. Am I wrong?
No, that is not the case, said Martin. I think the [prosecutors] file at least what I have
been able to understand of it is very misleading.
The main function of the OSA and his office was to explain to public officials and other
groups what Church of Scientology was, he insisted as well as working on the social
activities of the Church.
These are the main functions, he repeated. I know that in the case file there is an undue
focus on what we are talking about and I think that is quite incorrect in the way that it has
been presented.
The judge followed that thread. So was he suggesting that the prosecutor and the investigators
had simply understood nothing about the OSAs activities?
I noted the possibility that we might have misunderstood, he continued. But one has the
impression when one reads certain things, certain documents So are we interpreting these
things badly or what?
That is a long question, said Martin. Let me try to break it down.
Ill give you an example, said the judge. And he mentioned the police raid on Scientology
premises on September 30, 1999.
Judge Rgimont was stepping up a gear.
Picture: "Interior, Palais de Justice, Bruxelles", by Jean Housen, Creative Commons licence.
* While most of the defendants were not identified during the trial, Martin W. was one of a
handle of Scientologists named in some media reports: the role he once played as a Church
spokesman meant he was already a public figure. I am nevertheless adopting the same policy
with all the defendants and respecting the general convention in the Belgian media, which is
not to identify defendants before they have actually been convicted.
1) See in particular, Apostates.
2) The prosecutor dropped the charges against the European office later in the trial, leaving the
Church of Scientology Belgium as the only organisation targeted.

23. Passwords and Codenames

A defendant in the Belgian trial of Scientology denied trying

to conceal computer discs during a police raid on Church
offices.
Judge Yves Rgimont had already established that the defendant, Englishman Martin W.
occupied a post in the Scientologys Office of Special Affairs, or OSA. What he was not sure
about however, was just what the OSA did.
Was it, as Martin insisted, just the external affairs wing of the Church, reaching out to other
groups and dealing with legal matters as and when they arose?
The evidence in the files had suggested that the OSA was something more than that, the judge
had noted: a kind of security service for the Church. Martin W. flatly denied this, and argued
as several of his fellow defendants had done before him that the prosecution file presented
a distorted picture of Scientology.
So now Judge Rgimont tackled him on specifics, starting with the events of the September
30, 1999, when police raided Scientology premises in Brussels as part of their investigation.
The judge referred to an account he had among his papers, a police report on that operation.
Officers had found Monsieur W. on the premises when they raided the Church of Scientology
offices, and they said they had caught him trying to get rid of a computer floppy disc or
several of them before police could seize them.
I have no idea what you are talking about, said Martin. I was not trying to destroy
anything.
Clearly there had been a communication breakdown: the judge had said he had tried to get rid
of the discs, not destroy them. But since Martin was using the services of a court interpreter
and addressing the court in English, there was certainly room for confusion.
Judge Rgimont tried again. You were trying to give them to someone.
Certainly he was, said Martin. I dont see what the problem is. What had happened was that
he had been working in his office when the police arrived. An officer had walked in, he said,

he hadnt even bother to identify himself as being from the police. He spoke to me in French
and I didnt understand what he was saying, he added.
He told me to go downstairs, so I took my disc and went downstairs, and I was asked then to
go in for an interview. He was ready to go, but passed on the disc to a colleague so she could
continue working, he said.
Once again, the judge consulted the police report. You tell me if the investigators are lying,
he said.
The police enter to help their colleagues who are trying to carry out a search..., he said,
referring to the document, ...but have trouble controlling the staff, including Monsieur W.,
who is trying to escape their surveillance. The police observe that he is trying to pass an
object to a colleague: three computer discs.
No, said Martin. What had happened was the police had told them to go into a room with all
the other members of the Church and he had given the discs to a female colleague. (To
confuse matters even further, he added, the police raid had taken place when they were in the
middle of a move.)
So the description is not correct, said the judge.
Im not saying they are lying, Martin replied. But that is not correct. The judge had the
clerk make a written note of that, as he did any point that he thought particularly important.
Once he had done that, Martin said: I would also add that I was not arrested. I was not
informed that I should or should not do anything. I was simply asked to go for an interview at
the police station. The judge had the clerk note that too. Perhaps we have different views on
what happened, said Martin. But that is how I see it.

If you have nothing to hide, why do you use codes and codenames? the judge asked.
But the judge was not done. On the same line of reasoning, we get a certain number of discs.
we analyse them and we realize that these discs are cod encrypted. (1)
Martin did not see the problem. It is normal to encode communications when you are sending
them, he said.
When the information is not particularly sensitive, what is the point? the judge asked.
To maintain confidentiality, the defendant replied. There was nothing illegal in any of it,
he added.
Absolutely, said the judge. So we decode this disc and we discover, notably, a file that
concerns vitamins and the potential damage that excess doses could do. That is a very
sensitive piece of information for the Church.

One of the many services given by the Church is the Purification Rundown, which involves
the use of vitamins, the judge pointed out. Here is a document that says you need to be
careful with this, the judge noted, referring to the doses prescribed during the Rundown. (2)
He found it a little strange that the disc containing this document had been encrypted.
I will explain, said Martin.
One of my responsibilities was to see what laws were being passed in order to ensure that the
churches throughout Europe complied with them. At the time, there was a European law that
concerned the use of vitamins and the law said that the community would decide what were
the upper safe-level limits of certain vitamins.
He remembered very well having attached a report or a summary of a report on just this
subject from an expert, ...so the Church would understand what was occurring. In the end,
there had been no decision on what constituted a safe limit and even today, 20 years later,
there was still no European legislation on the matter, he added.
In other words, Martin said, he had simply been doing part of his job, which included
gathering information of interest to the Church ...to inform concerned people about what was
going in.
You understand, said Judge Rgimont, that when you note a certain kind of behaviour
even if you think it was misinterpreted and you find a disc that has been coded, twice, and
you find information concerning a sensitive subject, vitamins, you can understand that the
investigators would ask questions about the role of OSA?
Why does this have to stay confidential? the judge asked presumably referring to the
report on the vitamins.
It doesnt have to be confidential, said Martin, But people hack computers ... so I didnt
want information to be stolen.
Do you use codenames with people? the judge asked.
Well, clearly I did in one instance, Martin replied.
Why do you do that? the judge asked. You reproach us (for) our interpretations, but if you
have nothing to hide, why use codes and code-names?
Im not sure I understand, Martin replied. But if I understand, you are asking why did I use
a coded name? Because the person asked me not to put his name in a church document, so I
respected that.
In one of the discs we find a request to OSA Copenhagen to pay the coded person, the judge
noted. What is that?
It is a payment for the service, Martin replied.

The judge noted that explanation, but it nevertheless struck him as strange for an organisation
that talked so much about transparency to be using code names for people. How does that
look? he asked, rhetorically. And you say you are completely transparent.
Pas de problme, the judge added, in what sounded rather like a verbal shrug.
* While most of the defendants were not identified during the trial, Martin W. was one of a
handle of Scientologists named in some media reports: the role he once played as a Church
spokesman meant he was already a public figure. I am nevertheless adopting the same policy
with all the defendants and respecting the general convention in the Belgian media, which is
not to identify defendants before they have actually been convicted.
Picture: screen shot from 1 Matrix Hour Rain Code.
1) It was not entirely clear what kind of encryption was used, but the impression I got in court
was that this was rather more than just a simple password.
2) The Purification Rundown is a treatment devised by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard
which involves aerobic exercise normally running hours in a sauna and increasingly large
doses of vitamins and minerals. The charges in the indictment included the alleged illegal
practice of medicine.
The Rundown has been criticised by some medical experts as potentially dangerous. What the
investigators appeared to have come across then, was a document echoing some of these
reservations.

24. False Reports

The judge in the Belgian trial of Scientology repeatedly

pressed one defendant to explain why he took so many
security precautions if he had nothing to hide.
Judge Yves Rgimont had already questioned English defendant Martin W. about computer
discs that investigators had said he had tried to conceal from police when they had raided
Scientologys offices in 1999. He had categorically denied that claim.

It had also struck the judge as strange that the discs had been password-protected and that at
least one of the people with whom he was dealing in his work for Scientologys Office of
Special Affairs (OSA) was identified only by a codename.
Martin had explained that the passwords were a simple precaution against hackers; and the
codename had been at his contacts request.
He had also denied a suggestion that the OSA operated as a kind of security service for
Scientology. But the judge nevertheless found it strange that an organisation that talked so
much about transparency should behave in this way.
Let me explain, said Martin.
The vast majority of his work consisted of outreach work such as public relations and human
rights activities. You have to understand the context in which this was done, he added. The
Church at the time was under a lot of attack from different quarters.
To give you some examples, I was dealing with literally hundreds of of cases of religious
discrimination, not only against my church but other minority religions, mainly in Germany
and France and somewhat in Belgium.
For example, I know of someone who was a piano teacher who was thrown out of her job
because she was a Scientologist. I know of children who were refused entry into kindergarten
simply because their parents were Scientologists.
Government departments were requiring people to sign a statement that they were not in
Scientology before they were allowed to have a job. Someone who worked in an atomic
energy plant was thrown out, just because they were a Scientologist They were not
promoting their religion, they were thrown out because they were Scientologists.
All these, and as I said, hundreds of other cases, were blatant examples of human rights
violations and it was coming from somewhere. Someone was generating false reports about
my Church and the other minority religions.
Things were often taken out of context, misrepresented, so if you ask me why I keep things
confidential, it is because I knew that there were people who were doing this kind of thing.
But you are in the Church of Scientology Belgium, said the judge. And as far as I know
you work in an office in Belgium, and so far as I know, no one is required to sign such
documents in Belgium. So why, the judge asked, would you suspect a leak in Belgium?
I dont know where the leak may have been, but I was talking about hackers accessing a
computer from anywhere, Martin replied. So I think I was completely justified in
maintaining confidentiality.

Why, the judge asked, had he helped a Euro-deputy recruit a

Scientologist as an assistant?
The judge went back to the police accusation that he had tried to conceal computer discs from
police during the 1999 raid of the Churchs Brussels offices, something Martin had already

categorically denied. He had insisted he simply passed them to a colleague so she could
continue working while he went with police to the station for questioning.
Why did you give it to this person? the judge asked.
Because I did not want to take it with me, said Martin.
Why?
Because I did not know what was happening, so I had rather that the disc stay with someone
I trusted.. So he had left it with Anita, another member of the Church.
The judge still found it strange that he had left such sensitive material with someone he did
not actually work with. Her position had nothing to do with why I gave it to her, Martin
replied. She was a friend.
So you trusted this person, said the judge. But what he still wanted to know was why he had
not wanted anyone to find the disc a password-protected disc, mind on him?
Because I saw that all the things were being taken from the Church and these were current
activities that I was working on, so I wanted to be sure that I could continue to work on
them.
So it wasnt because you didnt want us finding out what was on these discs? the judge
asked.
By this time, Martin was beginning to feel the pressure. Some of his fellow defendants had
dissolved into tears when the judge kept pressing for clearer answers: not Martin, but he was
becoming increasingly exasperated.
The reason was as I said because I wanted to be able to continue working, he said. And
what I saw was my Church being raided and stopped from working, and I didnt want to be
stopped from working.
Judge Rgimont went back to the actual contents of the discs in question. Investigators had
found a document about an MEP (a member of the European Parliament) who was looking for
a secretary. Martin W. had helped find a Scientologist to fill the position, the judge noted.
Is that accurate? the judge asked. Or is that just a far-fetched interpretation of the
investigators?
I will explain, said Martin. He did not want this to misinterpreted, he added. I can explain
the situation. The MEP was also someone who wrote about the Holocaust and he had met a
colleague of Martins in the United States, he said.
He knew of the work we were doing in exposing human rights abuses and discrimination,
and he asked my colleague if he knew of anybody who would be interested in helping him in
the European Parliament. She in turn asked me if I knew anybody. I eventually found
somebody and she started to work for him.

And did this writer, this MEP, know that the person hired was a Scientologist, the judge
asked?
Absolutely, said Martin. And can I just add, I do not understand why this is in the case file.
If there was some wrongdoing, then why did the prosecutor not question the MEP or her
assistant?
The judge acknowledged Martins explanation: but he repeated that what had struck the
investigators and the prosecutors office as strange, was that when the police had raided
Scientologys offices Martin had had three computer discs in his possession, discs that were
password-protected. And those discs turned out to have fairly sensitive information on them.
You say you dont see the problem, said the judge. Can you not understand that one might
ask about the real role of the OSA? Because he was still not clear about what exactly the
OSA did, said the judge. You have never given us a clear explanation.
Excuse me, said Martin, indignant now. I thought I had answered that question. As
indeed he had, (if not to the judges satisfaction).
He tried again: the OSA was to present the work of the Church to governmental and nongovernmental organisations, work that was important because Scientology needed to correct
the false information about the Church. The OSA also rolled out the Churchs social reform
activities, he added: That is the primary role of the OSA, he insisted.
If you dont understand, let me give you an example, he added, with more than a hint of
irritation. But the judge broke in again: he had some examples of his own.
* While most of the defendants were not identified during the trial, Martin W. was one of a
handle of Scientologists named in some media reports: the role he once played as a Church
spokesman meant he was already a public figure. I am nevertheless adopting the same policy
with all the defendants and respecting the general convention in the Belgian media, which is
not to identify defendants before they have actually been convicted.
Photo: "Palais de Justice de Bruxelles"by Roby, courtesy of a GNU License.
1) These were cases that Scientology cited in the 1990s in Germany and in France. See here for
more on Scientologys position on what it says is discrimination in Germany; and here for
Scientologys submission to the OSCE on its allegations of religious discrimination by the French
authorities.

25. Black Propaganda

Black propaganda is what Scientologys enemies practise

against it, not something the Church itself condones, a
defendant told the Belgian trial of the Church.
Martin W.* was having trouble convincing Judge Yves Rgimont that Scientologys Office of
Special Affairs (OSA) was nothing more than he had said it was.
All the OSA did, he insisted, was try to inform both governmental and non-governmental
organisations about Scientology and promote the Churchs social reform programmes. All
they did, he said, was work to correct all the false information that was spread about the
Church.
Given what he had found in the case files however, the judge could not help thinking that the
OSA operated as Scientologys security service, something Martin flatly denied.
But in that case, the judge wanted to know, what exactly was the difference between the OSA
and Scientologys Brussels-based European Office for Public Affairs and Human Rights?
Martin tried more than once to reformulate his answer, to nuance the differences. But each
time, he came up against the same objection from Judge Rgimont.
As much as Martin had denied his suggestion that the OSA operated as Scientologys security
service, that was where the evidence in the files pointed, said the judge. When you find not
one, but a whole series of elements, all going in the same sense,.... one wonders about the role
of the OSA.
There were the password-protected computer discs which, according to police officers present
during the 1999 raid on Scientology premises, Martin had tried to hide. This too, he had
vehemently denied.
Judge Rgimont had questioned him about several documents found on the discs in question:
an expert report alerting Scientology to the dangers of the excessive use of vitamins
(particularly relevant in the context of Scientologys Purification Rundown);

 a mystery contact who was paid for information and identified only by a codename;

and a document detailing Martins role in finding a Scientologist to take up the role of
assistant to a Member of the European Parliament;
Martin had provided explanations for each these documents and argued that the investigators
and prosecutors had insisted on putting the most sinister interpretation on perfectly innocent
activities.
But Judge Rgimont had made it clear he was still troubled that so many sensitive documents
had been found on password-protected computer discs.
And now he came up with another example of what the police raid had turned up: a file on the
investigating magistrate heading up the case.
Now did he understand why investigators thought there was more to the OSA than he was
admitting to, the judge asked? It was a bit strange, wasnt it? What does that mean?
They had found press cuttings on the magistrate handling the Scientology investigation in
Martins office. How do you explain that? What were these documents doing there? (1)
The judge had been speaking for a while now, so Martin was a bit overwhelmed. Actually, I
dont quite remember why I had that file, to be honest, he said, after a couple of false of
starts.
He had received the file from another Scientologist, Jacky Vaquette, he said. (2) He was not
even sure what was in it. I read the headlines, but I dont really remember what they were
saying. They were just newspaper articles, nothing more than that.
You said you did not understand, said the judge. But they were accompanied by English
summaries.
Possibly, whatever, said Martin. But in any case they were just press articles. (Martin,
originally from England, did not appear to be fluent in French, despite the years he had spent
in France and Belgium with Scientology. He addressed the court in English and throughout
the trial made use of the court interpreters to follow proceedings.)
Judge Rgimont changed tack again. What is black propaganda in the Church of
Scientology? he asked.
Black propaganda is when somebody spreads false information, disinformation, lies etc,
about somebody else, said Martin. It is not an action that the Church condones..
References to black propaganda in Scientology literature were ...observations of what is done
not only to the Church but to other churches, he added.
But which the Church does not apply? the judge asked.
Absolutely not, Martin replied. I would like to say that one of the prime policies of the
Church is never to do anything illegal.

I would like to add, said the defendant, that I am really

misrepresented in the file as a lot of things have been in the
file.
The prosecutor says the Church and some of the defendants have broken the law in this
area, the judge said, referring to Belgiums privacy laws. ...and clearly you interested
yourself in the problem.
By now, the judge had been questioning Martin for nearly two hours, so court adjourned
briefly. When the session resumed, Judge Rgimont started working another seam of the
evidence.
The judge checked what Martin had already told him: that although he worked out of an
office in the Church of Scientology Belgium building, he was part of a different operation
entirely, that of the Scientologys European Office for Public Affairs and Human Rights.
Martin confirmed that.
And yet the car he used was registered to the Church, said the judge. There was some
confusion too, in the bank accounts.
The car was just a facility they offered him just in the same way they gave him office space,
said Martin. As for the banking arrangements, it might have been better to have opened a
separate account, but at the time he had not thought it would be a problem. In any case, he had
neither given money to nor received money from the Church of Scientology Belgium. Most of
his funding came from the Copenhagen Church, he added.
And the tax control of the Church, said the judge: why had he got involved in responding to
the tax offices inquiries if he was not a part of the Church in Belgium, if it was not his
problem?
That information was from a court document a procs-verbal that misrepresented the
facts, said Martin. What actually happened was the tax inspectors came to the offices of the
Church. They specifically asked to come and see me, he explained. The asked him a series of
questions, he answered them and they went away and continued with the tax inspection.
I would like to add that I am really misrepresented in the file as a lot of things have been in
the file.
But why, the judge asked, would the tax inspectors have asked to see him?
I have no idea, Martin replied. He had explained to the tax inspectors that he was not part of
the CoS Belgium but worked with the Office of Public Affairs. But the officers had wanted to
speak to him and to (fellow defendant) Marc B, who was not there that day. Nor could he
explain why they had been singled out for special attention. I must say I found it strange.

The prosecutor says the Church and some of the defendants

have broken the law in this area, and clearly you interested
yourself in the problem. said the judge.

When the judge asked about how his work was funded Martin explained that his position was
unpaid but that the Church in Copenhagen and in France, where he had been previously
met some of his costs. To make ends he meet did other work on the side: he had one job
editing a shipping magazine; and he also did work for Belgian companies U-Man and Hydrex
as a public relations consultant and a legal adviser. (3)
Judge Rgimont wondered about the extent of that work because they had found a number of
bills from U-man for the PR and legal work.
U-Man uses the technology of Mr. Hubbard, said Martin. And precisely they operated as a
company run along Scientology lines they had experienced discrimination. It was in that
capacity that I was advising them.
So you were resolving legal problems, said the judge. Are you a lawyer?
He was not, said Martin, but U-Man did not have anyone handling such matters. Perhaps I
should add that I was dealing with legal affairs in England. A lot of OSA activities are with
legal affairs.
What was this legal advice that you gave to U-Man? Was it related to Scientology rules?
the judge asked.
It was nothing like that, said Martin. Perhaps it would be better to call it legal liaison.
But then the judge got back to the documents found on the computer discs: among them, he
said, were a whole series on the application of the Belgian laws on private life.
What was the point? To inform the Church? the judge asked? Because since the start of the
trial the defendants had been telling the court that had no know they were breaking the law, he
added.
The prosecutor says the Church and some of the defendants have broken the law in this area,
and clearly you interested yourself in the problem.
That was part of his job, said Martin. As I explained earlier, one of the roles that I had was to
see if there was any European legislation that could affect the Church. So I asked a European
data expert to do an analysis of European law and also to d an analysis of how it would be
applied in different countries. He forgot how many exactly: eight or 10 exactly.
Once the report on the data protection laws had been prepared, the findings were went to the
churches in those countries to ensure they took the necessary measures.
So there was an awareness in the Church of Scientology or you in particular that there
was legislation and it had to be respected, said the judge. You informed the local churches
but it was for them to handle from there.
Yes, said Martin. And this was done in Belgium too, he added. When the judge asked when
this was done, after some consultation with his lawyer they concluded it had been in June
2000. (4)

Judge Rgimont went back to the computer discs. Another document they had found there
was a list of Euro-deputies: Members of the European Parliament.
What was that for? he asked. To help your campaign work?
Which list? Martin asked. It doesnt ring a bell. The judge did not pursue the matter.
Instead, he handed over the questioning to the prosecutor, Christophe Caliman.
* While most of the defendants were not identified during the trial, Martin W. was one of a
handle of Scientologists named in some media reports: the role he once played as a Church
spokesman meant he was already a public figure. I am nevertheless adopting the same policy
with all the defendants and respecting the general convention in the Belgian media, which is
not to identify defendants before they have actually been convicted.
1) The investigating magistrate for this first stage of the case was Jean-Claude Van Espen.
What was not entirely clear from the exchanges in court was whether the judge was talking
exclusively about a file of press cuttings kept on Van Espen, or whether there were other
documents.
2) Vaquettes name came up more than once during the trial. He is not one of the defendants.
3) Both U-Man and Hydrex were, at least in the 1990s, run by Scientologists. They feature in at
least one edition of the directory of the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises (WISE).
4) If the legal advice on data protection was circulated in June 2000, as the defence seemed to be
saying, that would mean it happened after the September 1999 police raids.

Photo: Palais de Justice, place Poelaert, Bruxelles, by Michel Wal, under a Creative
Commons licence.

26. "Don't ever defend. Always attack..."

A defendant in the Belgian trial of Scientology denied using

the kind of attack tactics set out in directives written by the
Churchs founder.

After more than two hours of close questioning from Judge Yves Rgimont, Martin W*, a
member of Scientologys Office of Special Affairs, now faced the prosecutor Christophe
Caliman.
Caliman started by asking him about his current activities: was he doing the same thing or had
he moved on to other activities? Martin explained that since 2006 he was no longer an active
member of the Church. He currently lived in Britain.
That struck the prosecutor as strange, because documents filed to the court by the
investigators had him as an active member of the Church of Scientology in Belgium.
I was never an active member of the Belgian Church because have never been a member,
said Martin tersely: he had explained this to the judge several times already. It was not a
trivial issue.
Already, Judge Yves Rgimont had been testing his claim that he was only part of
Scientologys Office of Public Affairs in Brussels: that the two organisations were entirely
separate. If it could be established that he had had some kind of executive role in the Church,
then that might mean that, in the event of the Church being convicted, the liability for any
criminal activity attached to the Church could be extended to him. (1)
Do you still go to the European office? the prosecutor asked. Since 2006, did he still have
an office there? Martin said he did occasionally visit Brussels, but only to see his friends
there.
Now Caliman referred to his files. Can you help explain what this means? he said.
He began quoting from a policy letter written by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard on
August 15, 1960: The Dept. Govt. Affairs. In this document, said the prosecutor, Hubbard
was describing how to respond to attacks on the movement.
And in this directive, said the prosecutor, it says that you have to
(1) Find out if we want to play the offered game or not, (2) If not, to derail the offered game
with a feint or attack upon the most vulnerable point. which can be disclosed in the enemy
ranks, (3) Make enough threat or clamor to cause the enemy to quail, (4) Don't try to get any
money out of it, (5) Make every attack by us also sell Scientology and (6) Win.
If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization, always find
or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace. Peace is bought
with an exchange of advantage, so make the advantage and then settle. Don't ever defend.
Always attack. Don't ever do nothing. Unexpected attacks in the rear of the enemy's front
ranks work best.
Never put the organization on "wait" because of courts or other matters. (2)
Martin was not impressed. He was addressing the court in English and required a courtappointed interpreter to translate all the questions put to him from French back to English.
In any case, this is a free translation of something. I need to study this before he said,
before his lawyer, Matre Quentin Wauters, jumped in. In these conditions, said the lawyer,

without the original version to hand, they were not in a position to answer any questions on
the document.
Caliman pressed on regardless. Here was a shorter passage, he said, at the end of the same
text:
The goal of the Department is to bring the government and hostile philosophies or societies
into a state of complete compliance with the goals of Scientology. (3)
Im sorry, said Martin, but I need to see the document.

It is out of context," said his lawyer. "I could read extracts

from the Bible or the Koran and produce the same effect."
Caliman looked sceptical. For someone who occupies an important place in the OSA
[Scientologys Office of Special Affairs] this is a fundamental text for the OSA.
It struck him as strange, he said, that Monsieur W. was not familiar with what appeared to be
a key policy letter from Scientologys founder.
There are thousands of policy letters of Mr. Hubbard, Martin replied. I am not trying to be
evasive. If I had the documents I need to sit down and read them.
The one thing that had jumped out from the previous passage, was the phrase Dont defend,
always attack, Martin added ...and of course you have to defend if you are attacked. It
doesnt make sense to me.
So Caliman tried him with another Hubbard text, this one a 1966 policy letter called Attacks
on Scientology, in which Hubbard gave instructions on how to respond to the movements
enemies.
This is correct procedure:
(1) Spot who is attacking us.
(2) Start Investigating them promptly for FELONIES or worse using our own professionals,
not outside agencies.
(3) Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them.
(4) Start feeding lurid, blood, sex, crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press.
Does that ring a bell? Caliman asked.
Matre Wauters stepped in once more for his client. Was this the whole text? No? Then I ask
you to withdraw it. It is out of context. I could read extracts from the Bible or the Koran and
produce the same effect.
The prosecutor Caliman agreed: context was everything, he said, and it would be only right to
submit the whole document to the court. The judge took note.

Eventually the defendant, Martin W., was asked again if he wanted to respond. I dont even
understand the question at this point, he said. But he did remember parts of what had been
read to him.
Do I work like that? No. It is difficult for me to even understand what he is even talking
about. It is a free translation of what he is talking about.
As Judge Rgimont had his clerk make a formal note of his answer, the defendant added: But
if he wants to give the reference to my lawyer, I can read it and give a response.
The prosecutor however wanted to move on from theory to practice. He had what he thought
was a practical application of the policy just cited, even if this particular example did not
concern the defendant directly.
It was a June 6 1992 telex that investigators had turned up presumably seized during the
1999 raid on Scientologys offices. It was from the Central Europe Programs Chief OSA
Europe, and concerned a Belgian deputy, Bertouille. (5)
Bertouille had bothered Scientology to the point that the OSA officer who wrote the memo
wanted something called the ARM unit in place in Belgium to look into this deputy. (6)
The prosecutor seemed to be suggesting that Monsieur le dput might have been investigated
in the manner set out in the document he had just quoted the one Monsieur W. doesnt
remember, Caliman added, rolling his eyes heavenward.
That was not what he had said, the judge pointed out. Caliman raised his eyebrows, but he did
not press the point.
There was talk in this telex of exposing the crimes of the deputy concerned, said the
prosecutor. So what he wanted to ask the defendant was this: was this kind of practical
application of the texts he had just quoted ever part of his work? What was his view on this
kind of practice?
I have to say that I am at a great disadvantage, said Martin. I have not read that document.
Not a single document has been translated for me apart from the rquisitoire (the indictment).
That apparently is not addressed to me," he said of the telex, "and I am being asked for my
opinion. That doesnt concern me. What am I supposed to say about that? I need to sit down
and study that.
Or you could read the text in the original," said the prosecutor. "That is no problem. The
document is here.
But the judge stepped in. In any case, that doesnt concern him. Caliman did not press the
matter. He turned instead to his next set of documents.
* While most of the defendants were not identified during the trial, Martin W. was one of a
handle of Scientologists named in some media reports: the role he once played as a Church
spokesman meant he was already a public figure. I am nevertheless adopting the same policy
with all the defendants and respecting the general convention in the Belgian media, which is
not to identify defendants before they have actually been convicted.

1) This issue became even more important a few weeks later when the prosecutor, in his closing
argument, said he was dropping the charges against the European Office for Public Affairs and
Human Rights, the organisation for which Martin W. worked.
2) From the original, English text of Dept of Govt Affairs Hubbard Communications Office
Policy Letter, August 15, 1960.
3) Op. cit.: from the original, English text.
4) Attacks on Scientology: Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, February 25, 1966.
From the original English text.
5) This would be Andr Bertouille, who served in the 1990s a Liberal deputy. During a long
political career he also served as a senator and as education minister. It was Bertouille, along with
fellow liberal Jean Gol, who in February 1993 called for a committee of inquiry into the issue of
cults. (See L'tat belge face aux drives sectaires Courrier hebdomadaire du CRISP, 2006/3, n
1908).
6) A request for information on what the ARM unit might be produced the same response from a
number of former members and specialists in the subject. ARM stands for the Anti-Religious
Movement and the ARM unit is the team set up to deal with Scientologys critics, who are seen as
anti-religious activists. (Several Scientology websites describe Scientologys critics as "antireligious activists".) Garry Scarff pointed out that the same phrase crops up in another OSA telex
from September 1995, this time in Greece. My thanks too, to Mark Fisher, Tony Ortega, Laura
Dieckman, Caroline Letkeman and Mike Rinder, among others.

Photo: Palais de Justice, place Poelaert, Bruxelles, by Michel Wal, under a Creative
Commons licence.

27. Data Collection

Why did three Belgian gendarmes write reports for

Scientology on a notorious series of killings?

Prosecutor Christophe Caliman had confronted the defendant Martin W. with extracts of
directives from Scientologys founder, L. Ron Hubbard. In them, Hubbard set out the kind of
gloves off, no-holds-barred tactics he said should be used against the movements enemies.
Martin W. insisted he could not comment on the documents without having seen the English
originals (he was addressing the court in English and needed an interpreter throughout). But
he denied having operated in this kind of way during his time with Scientologys Office for
Special Affairs (OSA).
But Caliman was not done with him yet.
He wanted to quote two more of Hubbards policy letters that he thought relevant to Martin
W.s work with the European Office for Human Rights. One was from March 13, 1961 and
talked of keeping files on friends and enemies; the other from March 15, 1977, talked about
Scientologys prowess in handling data. (1)
Martin however, was losing patience. What is the question? he asked.
OSA handles data, handles personal data on friends and enemies of Scientology, said
Caliman. And they even say they are better than the secret service, he added, making it
clear that he was quoting Hubbard.
Investigators had found a form on which Scientologists were expected to write down
information on police and lawyers in Belgium and send them on to the OSA in Denmark.
Was this what Scientologists meant when they talked about gathering data? And what was the
purpose of such a database?
All I can say, said Martin, is if the prosecutor wants to ask me questions on things that I
have not read he should have given me copies in advance. He takes things out of context, it is
clear he takes things out of context. It is impossible to answer.
Okay, said the prosecutor. Independent of any text, do you, yes or no, handle personal data
on friends or enemies?
No, said Martin.
Caliman asked for that answer to be formally noted into the record, and Judge Rgimont
instructed the court clerk accordingly. Then the judge asked Martins lawyer, Matre Quentin
Wauters, if any question on Scientology documents was going to produce the same response
from the defendant. Matre Wauters could not say.
So he put the same question to Martin W., and he made it clear that he would only be able to
answer once he had the documents, in their original version, in front of him. Caliman
nevertheless returned to the case files.
Now he wanted to know about three Belgian gendarmes, former members of the Diane antiterrorism unit, who also happened to have been Scientologists.

Among the Scientology files seized during police raids, he said, investigators had found a
debriefing of these gendarmes after they had been questioned by the investigating magistrate
assigned to the hunt for the Brabant killers.
The Brabant killers were a group of criminals who in the 1980s carried out a series of
particularly violent robberies in Belgium. The crimes sparked all kinds of speculation as to
who they might be and what their real purpose was, but they were never caught. The
investigating magistrate in that case had apparently been investigating a possible link between
the killings and Scientology.
Prosecutor Caliman was quick to make it clear that he never believed that the Church was
connected to these crimes. But these debriefings to Scientology nevertheless constituted a
violation of the gendarmes duty of professional secrecy. They wrote reports to the Church
on things that they were not meant to share," he said.
So was it the duty of a Scientologist to report anything that might threaten the movement, he
asked? And should that duty take precedence over the laws of the land?

One of the most basic laws of Mr. Hubbard is to not do

anything illegal in your country or anywhere, said the
defendant.
As far as he knew, said Martin, the people concerned were no longer gendarmes at the time
they made their reports to Scientology. The officers had been amazed that they had been
called in to be questioned on this matter, he added, ...so in that context it was perfectly
natural for them to contact the Church.
So far as the prosecutors second question was concerned, he answered: I think you have no
understanding at all of what the ethics code of the Church is. One can compare it to canon law
in the Catholic Church. Catholic canon law is far more extensive than Church of Scientology
canon law.
Just as in the Catholic Church there were certain rules and regulations that members of the
Church had to follow, so there were in the Church of Scientology. But Scientology ethics
should not just be seen as a series of constraints, he added. Ethics is far more than that. I
should say ethics is a great help to people: it improves lives and minds. That is what ethics is
about.
Returning to the second part of the prosecutors question, he added: Does it supercede
national law? No. One of the most basic laws of Mr. Hubbard is to not do anything illegal in
your country or anywhere.
And this, he added, is another example for me of how the case file is slanted or angled in a
certain way. The case file says I infiltrated Europol or Interpol. I met openly with them as a
representative of the Church. Reading the case files however, it was clear to him that the
situation had been completely misrepresented.
Martin was referring to references to meetings he had had with the secretary general of
Interpol and the director of Europol.

Infiltration was perhaps putting it a bit strongly, Caliman objected.

That is what is in the case file, Matre Wauters replied.
It is ridiculous, honestly! said Martin. Of course they had held talks with Interpol, and
Interpol had eventually accepted that the reports about Scientology were false. How can you
put this in the files without considering this? I have been through almost 20 years of this!
By now, his voice was shaking with emotion. Finally, after some three hours on the stand, the
strain was beginning to show.
The prosecutor pointed out that in fact, it had been the investigating magistrate who had put
this in the files.
Last question, he said. He was interested in Martins work as legal liaison with the Church
of Scientology International and local units of the Church, including the one in Belgium.
Around 2000, perhaps in 1999, he had submitted an initial report in which he said that
according to the advice he had received there was no problem over the issue of data protection
and privacy, that they could go ahead. And yet the reports he had received from experts had
said that on the contrary, Belgian law was stricter than other European countries in this area.
So if he understood the question, said Martin, the prosecutor wanted to know if he had, in his
briefings to the other parts of the Church, included a detailed explanation of the advice he had
received.
Yes, said the prosecutor. What did this information say, and did you pass it on to the Belgian
Church?

The fact Scientology had consulted experts on the data

protection and privacy laws showed the good faith of the
Church, said the defendant.
Of course, he said. It is in the report. I cant not have mentioned it if it was in the report.
What I have read, said Caliman, is that there was a major problem because Belgian law
was stricter than other legislation.
Yes, it was clear that this particular expert had a certain perspective on the law, said Martin.
And that was why it was important to the local church of Scientology to consult their experts
and I am almost certain that they did that.
Caliman referred to another document from the Scientology files. This one suggested that
Martin had not been happy with this warning from this so-called expert as he had put it.
This person had suggested Scientology might be better moving out of Belgium to avoid
violating its strict privacy laws.
But this was irrelevant, said Martin. This was really a project for the Belgian Church to
implement. I dont know the details of what they did in this regard. Whatever that expert said,
he said, Martin added but that didnt mean that another expert hadnt said something else.

The prosecutor consulted the files. There had indeed been another expert. but Martin appeared
to have been unhappy that no one appeared to be able to offer a solution to their problem.
So when Monsieur W. [Martin] says the law was respected, my partial interpretation is
that when an expert says you would be better off in another country; and another raises
questions about Pre-Clear Files and Monsieur W. says, For me, there is no problem, what
does he have to say about this. Is it it a poor interpretation on my part? (2)
I think so, said Martin. But I will cut this short. Whatever the experts said is what they
said. It was not the final application of what was finally done regarding the data protection
laws.
And furthermore, I think this is a great example of how the Church is trying to find a
solution to the data protection laws, because it is trying to respect the law.
Caliman was not having that. His charge against the Church of Scientology was not that it had
failed to inform itself of the relevant law, but that having done so, it failed to take the
appropriate action.
Martin insisted that the Church had respected the law. I dont have the details, but the
Church will provide them. But obviously, they had consulted the experts for their opinion.
(3)
Judge Rgimont reminded him that it would be the court that would decide whether
Scientology had violated the law in this area or whether, as the defendant was arguing,
everything was in order. It is as simple as that.
I accept that completely, said Martin. The only thing that I would add is that it showed the
good faith of the Church.
And with that his questioning was over. He had been on the stand since a little after 9:00 am;
more than three hours.
* While most of the defendants were not identified during the trial, Martin W. was one of a
handle of Scientologists named in some media reports: the role he once played as a Church
spokesman meant he was already a public figure. I am nevertheless adopting the same policy
with all the defendants and respecting the general convention in the Belgian media, which is
not to identify defendants before they have actually been convicted.
Palais de Justice de Bruxelles, la salle des pas perdus by Ch. Brissa under a Creative
Commons licence.
1) The two policy letters the prosecutor mentioned are the following: "Department of Official
Affairs" (March 13, 1961); and Evaluation: The Situation (March 15, 1977).
2) Preclear files contain the notes taken by Scientologys auditors, or counsellors, during their
auditing sessions with other Scientologists. Their contents often contain deeply personal
information which is why their contents were relevant to Belgiums strict privacy and data
protection laws.

3) Later in the trial, during the defence legal arguments, they brought in an expert in the Dutch
data protection laws who argued at length, and in great detail, that in fact Scientology had not
violated those laws. You can see Professor Jos Dumortiers arguments in this thread of tweets
from the day.

28. Private Lives

Did Scientology really take Belgiums privacy laws seriously?

The judge at the trial of the Church pressed one defendant
whose duties had covered legal issues.
The next defendant to face the judge for questioning was Myriam Z., the only one of the 12
individuals on trial named on both parts of the charge sheet.
The case against her and the Church of Scientology Belgium was a composite of two separate
investigations that were eventually merged into one.
The first dated back to 1997, when the authorities opened an investigation into possible fraud
and breach of trust after former members filed complaints against the movement.
The second was launched after Actiris, the Brussels regional employment office, filed a
complaint in 2008 alleging that Scientology had used fake job ads to try to recruit members.
Myriam was from the Flemish part of Belgium. and while the proceedings were taking place
in French, she preferred to speak to the court in her mother tongue. As he had with the other
defendants, Judge Rgimont started by inviting her to describe her progress through
Scientology.
Her first contact, she said, had been through a friend who had given her a copy of Dianetics (a
book by Scientologys founder, L. Ron Hubbard). I read the book in a month, and it seemed
to me to be very interesting, she said. (1)
At first she was just an ordinary member, she said, doing a few courses and having some
auditing, (a kind of confessional-based therapy that Scientologists present as spiritual
counselling).

The pastoral advice was a great help in my life, she said. It helped answer a number of
questions in my life.
She worked teaching Dutch to adults. Judge Rgimont consulted his files. She had also
worked for U-Man, a company run by Scientologists along Scientology lines, he noted. She
confirmed that she had started doing occasional work for them, eventually working with them
as a consultant.
Pressed a little by the judge she conceded that, although she had been an independent
consultant, for a number of years U-Man had been her only client.
By 1999, she had signed up as a member of staff at the Church of Scientology where, in
addition to her normal duties, she worked on a voluntary, unpaid basis translating Scientology
books into Dutch.
It was at this time that she came to occupy senior positions inside the Church of Scientology
Belgium, including that of Director of Special Affairs (DSA). The DSA was a kind of local
branch of Scientology's Office of Special Affairs, or OSA.
The judge had already expressed a great deal of interest in the OSA, asking one defendant in
particular if it was not effectively Scientologys security service: a claim he denied. Myriam
too, described her duties as more in the line of public relations and media liaison activities.
After the 1997 parliamentary report on cults, she added, there were a whole series of rumours
about Scientology that had to be corrected.
My aim, because I had had a positive experience of Scientology, was to put forward the
positive side of Scientology, she explained. She also busied herself handing out books on
Scientology to the press.
That is public relations, said Judge Rgimont. But you had other roles. In 1999, you had a
very important role that went beyond that. He was thinking in particular of her job collecting
information on the application of the laws concerning privacy.
He reminded her about the computer disc seized by investigators during one of the police
raids on Scientologys offices.
Earlier, he had questioned Martin W., another defendant about these discs. Martin, who at the
time in question had worked for the OSA, had said that he had passed on the expert opinions
gathered on the privacy laws to the different churches throughout Europe including to the
Church of Scientology Belgium.

Had she never questioned the need for the intimate

information some Scientology forms required from members,
the judge asked?
It was Martin W. who gave you this information within weeks of you taking up this post,
the judge pointed out. Myriam acknowledged that the issue of privacy had landed on her desk
soon after she had started, in August 1999.

The judge was curious as to why the then president of the Church, fellow defendant Vincent
G. had not handled the matter. She explained that he was taken up with the day-to-day
running of the Church. It was the responsibility of the DSA to study this kind of thing and to
see how it could be applied, she added.
And what did you do? the judge asked. Because according to the prosecutor, there is a
problem. (The prosecutor maintained that under Belgiums privacy and data protection laws,
Scientology had no right to stock the kind of deeply personal information contained in some
of the files kept on members.)
Martin W. said he did a global study and passed the information on to the churches, Judge
Rgimont reminded her. But the prosecutor thinks you did your job badly.
Myriam seemed to think she knew what he had in mind: a case involving a certain Monsieur
G., who had wanted his details withdrawn from Scientologys database. She had been in
contact with Belgiums Commission for the Protection of Privacy to sort the matter out.
I took care of this and I asked the person handling this file if there were other cases of this
kind and that person sent me a file, she added.
Monsieur W. gave you a file: a study on respect for private life, saying that there might
possibly be a problem, the judge reminded her (he was referring to Martin W.). He said it
was of a general nature and that he had sent it to local offices, he added. And from there, he
had explained, it was for the individual offices to take appropriate action.
And that was where she came in.
I take it you did more than contact the Commission for the Protection of Privacy, the judge
added. Had she acted on the information that Martin W. had sent her? Had she contacted a
lawyer? Did you take concrete steps to see how this legislation should be applied? What did
you do, concretely? the judge asked.
Her first task had been sorting out the problem with this Monsieur G., she recalled. After that,
in September 1999, she had started looking at the issue of privacy but that was when the
police had raided Scientologys offices, she pointed out. (2) And after they finally left, in
October, it had taken them some time to get back to work, given the disorder.
But all this was in the 1999, the judge pointed out. The relevant law has been in force since
1991. Had the Church not studied this question before?
I dont know, said Myriam. She knew that on their application forms it said something
about religious files, but she could not recall exactly what it said.
Before you arrived, who handled this kind of problem? the judge asked. Was there no one
who took care of this before 1999?
No one had had that particular job for a year before she arrived, she said. The judge looked
surprised.
It is, after all, an extremely important function, he said. It is a role that is the link between
the outside world and the Church of Scientology Belgium.

And he reminded her that for a long time Scientology had been seen in a bad light: not just by
the media but by others. Had her predecessor not left any instructions?
Myriam said something about the police raid again.
So its the fault of the police raid? the judge asked.
She tried to explain that she had not had access to all the files when she had started her job
that August; that this task had been just one of many; and that after the police raid she had had
to try to cope with the negative press coverage that had followed.
So the the raid prevented you from working? the judge asked again.
Thats it, said Myriam. There were very few documents left. And because they had taken
away all the files from the accountancy section, they had even struggled to complete their tax
declaration for VAT.
The judge tried again: so she had got no help on how to handle the privacy laws once she
inherited that responsibility?
And those forms she had had to fill in when she joined staff, forms like the Life History form:
When they asked you fill that in, did you not ask questions about it? he wondered.
The Life History form includes extremely intimate questions: subjects are required, for
example, to provide a list of their past sexual partners and any perversions practised.
She had filled in because the job she was about to take up required it, she said. But yes, she
added, I did ask myself questions.
But then she explained: From the moral point of view of you have to meet a certain standard
and also for people who are going to do auditing [Scientology counselling] they have to
meet a fairly high ethical level.
So for you, in the end, to answer extremely personal questions for you that was okay, the
judge suggested.
I knew that it was not going to be used for anything else, so that posed no problem for me,
she replied.
The judge was not sure what she meant, so she elaborated.
Because I have enough experience of the Church of Scientology that I could trust people
most of the time, she added.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Detail from La Discrtion - Portrait of Pauline Appert, by Claude-Marie Dubufe, published
under a Creative Commons licence.

1) Hubbards 1950 book Dianetics: the Modern Science of Mental Health was first book in the
self-help field. Dianetics was a precursor of what became Scientology and was eventually
incorporated into the later system. (The book is often simply referred to by the initials of its title,
DMSMH.)
2) The police raid of Scientologys Brussels offices was on September 30, 1999.

29. Intimate details

Who exactly has access to sensitive Scientology files

containing personal information on members? The judge at the
Belgian trial pressed one defendant for details.
Judge Yves Rgimont had already asked Myriam Z. why Scientology in Belgium had not
moved to comply with Belgiums strict privacy laws when they were introduced in 1991.
As Director of Special Affairs (DSA) at the Church of Scientology in Brussels, that became
part of her responsibility when she took up the post in August 1999 just before the
September police raids.
Now he turned to the question of the sensitive, deeply personal information on members
scattered through the various Scientology documents that investigators had seized.
He started with the Preclear folders, which contain the notes of Scientologists auditing, or
counselling, sessions (and so almost inevitably include intimate details of their lives).
Had she had access to PC folders as part of her work? Myriam said she had access only to her
own PC file.
But I mean more generally, he said. We have heard a lot about these files. Some people
had access to the files; others not, he added. Cest un peu flou, he said. (Its not very clear.)
Were these files under lock and key? And was it the auditor and the ethics officer who had
access to these files?

Judge Rgimont was by now familiar with at least some of Scientologys terminology: the
auditor is the person who carries out the auditing, or counselling of a Preclear, who is a
Scientologist in the less advanced stages of his or her progress up what believers call the
Bridge to Total Freedom.
An ethics officer is the staff member whose responsibility it is to apply and if necessary
enforce Scientologys rules.
The auditor and the case supervisor had access, said Myriam. (The case supervisor oversees
Scientologists progress through the different courses.) Sometimes another auditor might be
asked to see a file, if that was thought necessary.
So as an auditor, she would have the right to look at a PC file, the judge concluded.
Yes, said Myriam. If I am asked to, in a specific context. But it depended on the context,
she added.
That is not important, said Judge Rgimont. What is important is to know if you could.
(Presumably, he had the terms of Belgiums strict privacy laws in mind.)
So my question is to know if in an auditor-auditee relationship, is there access? Could
someone by virtue of being an auditor, have access to someones file even someone they
were not necessarily auditing?
In specific cases, yes, said Myriam.
Judge Rgimont kept pressing: what kind of case?
She kept trying to explain and now the list of people with at least theoretical access to PC
files extended a little further: from auditors and case supervisors to someone called the
technical supervisor.
Judge Rgimont had the court clerk make a formal note: the auditor in theory had access to
any PC folder, he began
No, Myriam objected: That is not accurate.In a specific case, perhaps not to all PC files,
no.
Im just going from the prosecutors files here, said the judge.
But that contradicts everything that we have heard so far! the judge objected.
He continued dictating to the clerk. As the person responsible for the DSA, whose duties
include things to ensure the security of the Church of Scientology and as an auditor too
she would have been in a position to consult the files of x or y who could be a problem for
the Church, he said.
No, I wouldnt do that, Myriam protested.
But could you? the judge asked.

If there was a problem, it would be auditor or the case supervisor, she said.
But if there was a problem, you would be informed, the judge replied. What would you
say? Does this person have strange ideas?
How would that work? he asked.
For example, said Myriam. A person says that he doesnt want to continue with this
service and that he doesnt want to be audited and that he wants to stop his participation in the
Church and it stops there.

But that contradicts everything that we have heard so far!

said the judge.
He recapped what he had understood to be the case. PCs files are personal and it is between
the auditor and the auditee and then if someone says they dont want to continue, the auditor
says, Careful Monsieur X wants to leave the Church.
Does that not contradict the confessional nature of the PC file? he asked.
But they would let that person leave, said Myriam.
But that was not what the judge had understood from what she and other defendants had been
telling him. He had an entirely different picture, a point he had made repeatedly during the
first week of the trial.
What he had understood, he said, was that the auditor received sensitive information in the
course of auditing people, and while the auditor was meant to be bound by the secret of the
confessional, they could tell the case supervisor, who could tell the DSA and it was the
DSA, he said, who would determine if a person would pose a problem to the Church.
Cest quand mme contradictoire, he said. None of this squared with what Myriam Z. had
just told him.
But it wasnt like that, said Myriam. If someone says This is not my thing, I want to stop,
auditing is not my thing, I want to leave, then it stops there, she insisted.
That did not necessarily present a danger to the Church, she said. It is just the way you
arrange things so that person can leave the Church and you can do the necessary: delete his
name from the file so he is not contacted again, she added, by way of an example.
That is what you say now, said the judge. But we have seen that if someone leaves the
Church and does not ask to be wiped from the files
There is a difference between a person who doesnt come for a while because he had other
things to do and a person who says This is not my thing, said Myriam.
Personally, I know someone who had paid for a certain service but decided he didnt want to
continue and he asked for his refund," she added. "We refunded him and deleted his name
from our files."

The judge returned to the case files.

I know you are not directly concerned, but we have heard of Madame A., he said. He was
referring to one case he had already discussed with other defendants, of a woman who had
attempted suicide. Scientologists had tried to get her to sign a form clearing the Church of any
responsibility.
But what particularly interested him was the possibility that information from someone's
supposedly confidential file could be passed on to other people.
Surely that would be the kind of case that would have gone to the Director of Special Affairs'
office, the judge suggested.
That was before my time, Myriam objected.
But if it had happened during your time, would the DSA office have been informed or not?
the judge asked.
If a person really doesnt want to stay in the Church, it is important that the person can leave
the Church fairly and serenely, she replied. You would be told that.
Her lawyer, Matre Johan Scheers, stepped in. One her roles had been giving refunds, he said.
The case files had referred to four confidential files, but what were their contents? Nothing
more than correspondence relating to refunds, he said.
I understand Matre, You will have a chance to explain your side," said the judge.
Jattends que a, Matre Scheers replied with a smile.

"The police were in the auditing rooms, the offices were

placed under seal and we could no longer function as a
church."
Judge Rgimont revised the note he had been dictating to the clerk. Mme Z. was only
informed by the auditor or case supervisor that someone wanted to leave nothing else and
only because it was part of her job to handle refunds.
In no case would she receive information of a personal nature from either the auditor or the
case supervisor, he added.
That seemed to satisfy the defendant and the judge turned to the next matter on his list.
During a search of her home, police had found documents at her home that related both to the
investigating magistrate supervising the case and the prosecutor, Monsieur Caliman. What
were they doing there?
After the first police raids, the Scientology community was shocked, she said. That came
after a complaint from a person who wanted a refund after two years, when he should have
asked within three months.

"So they sent 110 police officers to our community of the Church of Scientology and with that
too the press had been informed about it two hours before they started the search, she added.
She had first heard about the raids when she was in her car and got a phone call from a
journalist at around noon asking her about it. I didnt know what was going on.
By the time she got to the Church premises at around 2:00 pm, there were police everywhere.
I was in shock and at the time I still didnt know what was going on..., she said. I also
heard later that they turned up at the addresses of several church members.
And several businesses supposedly linked to the Church of Scientology, the judge added.
Yes, said Myriam. It was really out of proportion the fact that one person had filed a
complaint.
But the judge was not about to let that one pass.
How did you know that it was out of proportion? he asked. You dont know that it was just
that. She said a lot more.
I didnt know at the time, said Myriam.
So at the time, you could not know what it was about, said the judge.
We didnt know at the time, she conceded. But afterwards we heard that it was only one
person.
But you have read her complaint, said the judge. It was not just about the refund but for a
whole series of reasons.
I read the complaint, she conceded. But that was before my time.
But Judge Rgimont insisted.
She complained about a lot more than that..., he said. When an investigating magistrate
receives a complaint with a whole series of issues, that is not trivial.
I dont know, said Myriam, but the whole Church was paralysed. We couldnt offer
services. The police were in the auditing rooms, the offices were placed under seal and we
could no longer function as a church.

But these were press articles, said the judge, and with
apologies to the press they are not always accurate!
As we didnt know what was going on, we wanted to know who this Van Espen was and
journalists gave us articles. Jean-Claude Van Espen was the investigating magistrate who
handled first part of the case. (1)
And black propaganda, the judge asked? The previous defendant, Martin W., had said it was
not something the Church practised. Did she confirm that?

She confirmed her colleagues position.

We just wanted to know what was happening. We knew that Van Espen had spoken to a
parliamentary committee but in connection with what we didnt know. (1)
They were concerned that the investigation of their activities be an honest one, without
preconceptions, she added.
But these were press articles, said the judge, and with apologies to the press they are
not always accurate!
We just wanted to know what was going on, said Myriam.
At the request of the defence, the judge had the clerk make a special note of the fact that the
first she had heard of the 1999 police raid was from a journalist and that before the raid had
even started.
By now it was nearly 11:00 am and the defendant had been on the stand for the best part of
two hours. The judge still wanted to ask her about the other affair the second investigation
launched years later and over which she had also been charged.
So after a brief pause, he resumed his questioning.
This time it was about the jobs ads that Scientology had placed in local papers; ads that had
sparked the second investigation and another series of police raids.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
1) Van Espen testified before the parliamentary committee that looked into the issue of cults
in 1996-7 (well before the first police raids on Scientology, in 1999). It is clear from even a
quick perusal of the report that Scientology was not the first controversial movement he had
investigated. An article in Scientology magazine Ethique & Libert subsequently denounced
him for having testified against religious minorities.
Photo: The Scientology case files from the Brussels courtroom (by the author).

30. "No experience necessary..."

Why did Scientology post a jobs ad in local papers when they

were not offering paid employment?
After a brief pause, Judge Yves Rgimont continued his questioning of Myriam Z.* By now it
was 11:00 am, so the defendant had been on the stand for the best part of two hours.
But now he wanted to ask her about the other affair the second investigation launched years
later and which had eventually been merged with the first.
Even if the two cases had eventually been merged into one, Myriam Z. was the only one of
the individual defendants to have been charged in both.
Judge Rgimont sketched out the details. This second inquiry had started, he reminded her,
after Scientology had posted adverts offering work.
Actiris, the Brussels regional employment office, had filed a complaint in 2008 alleging that
Scientology had used fake job ads to try to recruit members.
Earlier in the trial, the judge had already referred to the accounts from people who had
answered the ads expecting to find paid work. Investigators, he said, had established that more
than 300 people had replied to the ads.
Do you remember what happened there? the judge asked. Because you said at one point
that it was not really you who was behind it. Explain to us.
The campaign had been at the initiative of a colleague who had worked in another section, the
one that concerned itself with recruitment, Myriam explained. "He had taken the initiative to
put in an ad of that kind, she said.
The ad had been due to appear a week or two later, but he had been working during the day
while she had been working evenings She appeared to be suggesting that somewhere along
the line there had been a breakdown in communication. Then a lot of people started turning up
at the Church, she said.

There was a woman who said she had been promised a salary. It seemed that we had
promised things that had not been announced. Here, the interpreter seemed to be struggling
converting Myriam's Dutch into French. But the sense of it appeared to be that someone at the
Church had promised more than they could deliver.
We couldnt give them the salaries because we couldnt give them work contracts, she
explained. We could only give them work as volunteers
The aim was to find more active members, she added.
Generally speaking in the philosophy of the Church, the judge asked: do staff have to be
members of the Church?
Yes, said Myriam. Thats logical.
So, said the judge, the ads had gone in the free weeklies Passe-partout and Vlan:
Non-profit seeks administrative assistant training provided, no experience necessary.
And they had appeared in the jobs sections, the judge pointed out.
The phrasing of the ad: that does not seem part of the logic of the Church, the judge
remarked drily.
To keep telling me, Madame, that you should put the Church of Scientology in a correct
context, that people are talking nonsense (nimporte quoi), that you are being dragged through
the mud. Was this not a dream opportunity to restore your reputation?
Judge Rgimont was working up a head of steam now.
Why, he asked, did the Church have to put this ad in the employment section in the first
place?
Myriam repeated that it had been another colleague who had drawn it up. She tried to
elaborate, but the judge was not satisfied.
He dictated a note to the clerk of the court as he did when he wanted to summarise what he
considered to be key points.
Mme Z. says that so far as the advert in Vlams and Passe-partout is concerned, it was not she
who had the initiative for this ad but it is true that at it was at first published in the Jobs
section."
Once she had been informed of this, he added, she contacted a lawyer who told her that it
was not opportune to publish this ad in that section

One woman objected that as a Muslim she could not be part of

another religion. She was told: Dont worry Scientology is
not a religion.

And why, he asked, had they not identified Scientology in the ad?
It was a small ad and we did not have a lot of money, she replied.
That did not seem to satisfy the judge. He said something to the effect that there werent that
many more letters involved. There are no problems; there are only solutions, he added. (1)
Bien, he said; fine. It was his way of drawing a line under the matter.
Myriam laughed nervously.
And why, the judge asked, did no one say when people phoned You are at the Church of
Scientology?
I dispute that, said Myriam. People said Hello, Church of Scientology.
But some of the people who had filed complaints had said that when they arrived, the only
thing they saw was a Dianetics sign. So these people are talking nonsense? he asked.
Thats not quite right, said Myriam. It should say the Church of Scientology Belgium.
So all these people got it wrong? the judge said. Because if these people are all saying
things that are not accurate we are not going to get anywhere.
Myriam insisted on this point: so far as what was on the door as one went in, there was a
Dianetics sign on the left and a Church of Scientology sign in both languages (French and
Dutch).
So these people arrived, and what happened? asked the judge. Lets say they didnt
understand it was the Church of Scientology. I want to believe, he added. I want to believe
everything you tell me for now at least.
They say I was offered a salary and you say No? he left a question mark hanging at the
end of the sentences. Clearly, he was waiting for some explanation of these conflicting
accounts.
Myriam went over how the new arrivals were received; how they were given a tour of the
Churchs premises. We explained what the Church of Scientology was and then they saw a
film, a DVD that lasted about an hour, she added. And it would have been clear from that
film that Scientology was a religion.
Ill interrupt here, said the judge. He understood that Scientology considered itself a
religion: the previous week, the court had heard from a religious expert called by the defence
who had spelled that out.
But then, from the case files, he cited an account from a Moroccan woman, one of those who
had answered the job ad.
She had told the Scientologists: I am Muslim and so I cant be part of another religion, said
the judge, reading from her statement. One Scientologist had replied: Dont worry, its quite
compatible. Scientology is not a religion.

Either Scientologists were serious about their religion or they didnt think twice about saying
the opposite when it suited them, said the judge: which was it?
That is what this woman is saying, said the judge. Or she is lying too?
I dont know if that was said during an interview, said Myriam. But if it was said, it was an
error.
So the person she spoke to who said it was not a religion, she broke the rules of Scientology,
yes? the judge asked.
Yes, said Myriam. If she said that, then it was clearly not correct.
Do we know who said this? asked the judge. Do we know who told this person?
Because this is an enormous error in Scientology. I suppose this person has an ethics file, he
added.
Myriam mentioned a Madame P. who had been corrected several times regarding the
interviews she conducted, notably concerning the promise of a salary.

It was still not clear, said the judge, whether these people
were being recruited for jobs or as members of the Church.
And why, the judge asked, would Mme P. have advertised for people who had nothing to do
with Scientology? If there was a lack of personnel, why not place an internal announcement?
Why did you have to go outside to look for people when the logic of Scientology was that
Scientologists become staff?...
Why did you have to go outside? the judge asked. Was this Mme. P. some kind of a loose
cannon?
They had in fact placed internal ads and contacted several members of the Church, said
Myriam: but they did not have enough active members. Then Mme P. had come up with the
idea of using the small ads.
She herself had been busy with her human rights work at the time, working with a number of
volunteers, Myriam added.
There is nothing wrong with having people working as volunteers, said the judge. But
when you read the accounts given by the applicants, they were expected to sign official
forms.
It was still not clear to him, said the judge, whether these people were being recruited for jobs
or as members for the Church.
The point behind the forms was that the people should know what they were dealing with,
said Myriam.

So first you bring them in, said the judge, and then [you] convince them that if they want
to work they should adhere to the doctrine of Scientology?
People who work as active members are really convinced that they can really help people,
said Myriam, which seemed a bit of a non sequitur.
And training was provided, she added. That was in the ad. And when people come to do
training they have to know where they are and what they should do. So it was very important
to inform people correctly as to what Scientology was.
But the judge was not satisfied. And he was just getting started.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
The photo is of the Scientology job ad, a screen shot from the December 28, 2012 RTBF news
report.
1) He may have been quoting Andr Gide: Il ny a pas de problmes; il ny a que des
solutions.

31. "Human trafficking"

The judge in the Belgian trial of Scientology condemned the

treatment of job applicants who had worked at the Brussels
church for weeks in the hope of getting paid.
Judge Yves Rgimont was pressing the defendant Myriam Z.* hard on the question of the job
ads Scientology had placed in the local press: ads that in the end, did not lead to paid
employment.
She explained that she had not placed the ads herself; and that it was the mistake of an
individual Scientologist that some applicants were told they would be paid: but the judge did
not seem satisfied.

Each time Myriam answered one question, the judge produced a statement from one of the job
applicants that either contradicted her or raised another difficult question.
Now he produced one from another job seeker, a Monsieur J. He too had told investigators
how the job he thought he was applying for had never materialised.
I explained that I was there for a job and that we had not even talked about it in two days and
that in the end I had to commit to something without knowing what it was, he said in his
statement. The reaction of the Scientologists was that he could buy books and resell them to
make a living, he added.
For two days they talked about everything except a job, said the judge. How could she
reconcile that with what they had put in the job ads? You do not publish a job ad to convert
people to Scientology, he said.
I did not know Monsieur J. and I didnt speak to him, said Myriam. But he clearly
understood that it was not something for him.
"To my knowledge, of all the people who entered, there were only a few who bought a book,
and there were plenty of books on display it is not forbidden, she added.
The judge raised the case of another job applicant who had been handled by Madame P. She
had been told that she would earn 1,200-1,300 euros net. She had signed a church
membership form after being told that it was a job contract.
Mme P. should never have said this, said Myriam. We have corrected her on that.
Apparently that happened at the beginning but not after that.
There were 161 people who were approached in the same way! the judge retorted. Quand
mme!
Yes, said Myriam. But people were approached correctly. She named another
Scientologist involved in the project, a Mme. D. She never had any problems with anyone.
We can go on all morning, said the judge and he seemed more than willing to do so.
He mentioned another woman who had replied to the ad. She told investigators that she had
been promised paid work. She was asked extremely personal questions, said the judge. She
signed a membership contract, and then what?
Myriam knew the name and acknowledged the woman in question had not been happy with
her treatment. But they had intervened and put things right, she added.
Judge Rgimont cited another case: this time of a woman who had worked at the Church for
18 days in the hope of being paid, but in the end never was.
That is called human trafficking, Madame!
That was not the intention, Muriel protested. It was not in that spirit. It was in the spirit of
voluntary work it was not in the spirit of human trafficking.

I do not say that she was lying, said the defendant. But
she was not correctly informed
The judge was not convinced. One case, okay. Two? That can happen. Even three, even five
but around a hundred people, all of whom were looking for work, who were in precarious
circumstances, they all answered a vague advert
They even go so far as working 18 days in the hope of being paid, and finally realize that
they have been sold(1)
Was the idea to get more and more people to sign these contracts and never mind how? Is
that part of the philosophy of the Church of Scientology? What about all this talk of freedom?
They are not free, these people!
I didnt personally take part in this, said Myriam. When I met people, it was later They
needed to ask permission to do voluntary work. These are the people I saw. So I checked
again that these people had been well-informed.
But the judge had another statement, from another of the would-be job applicants.
A Mme B. had confronted Myriam about the fact that the contract she had signed was for
voluntary work, not paid employment. Mme B. had told investigators: She [Myriam] said I
had been told it was voluntary, which was false."
I do not say that she was lying, said Myriam. But what I am saying is that she was not
correctly informed and it is a shame that it happened that way. (2)
Bien, said the judge, and he moved on to the Life History Forms that some applicants had
been given to fill in: a questionnaire that includes extremely intimate questions including ones
about the subjects sex life.
When you asked people to fill in these forms with questions that are extremely indiscreet
the Life History Form some people asked what this had to do with their job, the judge
noted.
They signed a document in which they consented that this information be kept he added.
It is not true these people signed a document, said Myriam.
So are they lying, the judge asked again.
I dont know what this is about but I know that these people signed documents to do with the
protection of private life, she replied.

It is true that this exercise was not a success, she conceded.

Judge Rgimont produced another case: a job applicant who had signed a document stating
she declared her membership of the Church of Scientology and pledged to spread the
Scientology word. When investigators had questioned Mme V. about it, she said she thought
they had mixed up the forms.

"If they signed it it was a mistake," Mme V. had told investigators. "And it was Mme Z. who
should have checked."
So," the judge asked. "Why have people signed this when they came for a job?
It was not the aim to give them a job or a work contract, said Myriam.
Im sorry, but the advertisement was for a job, said the judge.
It was fairly general, she replied. And I checked with the lawyers and with Actiris and they
said it was not a problem.
That was afterwards, said the judge. And it is strange that Actiris should say that when
they filed the complaint. (It was the complaint filed by Actiris, the Brussels regional
employment office, that had set off the investigation.)
It is true that this exercise was not a success, she conceded.
That is putting it mildly! said the judge. Did you contact these people afterwards?
I was not involved in day-to-day activities, Myriam replied.
You were president in 2008! the judge objected. You were responsible for the daily
operations of the Church, that was part of your daily activity, so how could you fail to know?
We took this initiative and I was informed, she said, but the judge was becoming
increasingly exasperated. It is true that this exercise was not a success, she conceded.
That is putting it mildly! said the judge. Did you contact these people afterwards?
I was not involved in day-to-day activities, Myriam replied.
You were president in 2008! the judge objected. You were responsible for the daily
operations of the Church, that was part of your daily activity, so how could you fail to know?
We took this initiative and I was informed, she said, but the judge was becoming
increasingly exasperated. "So you are a president who does not know what is happening in her
operation!

It wasnt me, it was the other person,: that is what you keep
telling me, said the judge.
You explained to me earlier what the presidents responsibilities were and now you are
saying that when you were president, you were not involved in the daily activities.
Im sorry, he said, but that is fairly strange.
Myriam explained that even though she had assumed the presidents role, she had retained her
earlier post as Director of Special Affairs (DSA).

So you could handle both jobs, but not Monsieur G.? asked the judge, referring to one of
her predecessors as president of the Church, fellow defendant Vincent G.
Myriam tried to reply, but the judge was losing patience.
It wasnt me, it was the other person: that is what you keep telling me, he said. It wasnt
me, it wasnt me, it wasnt me it was someone else.
It was Mme B. who took that initiative and Mme V. was responsible for managing
personnel, she said.
We will hear from her later, said the judge. Jeannine V was the one defendant in court he
had yet to question.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Photo: "Galeries de faade du palais de Justice de Bruxelles" by Jean Houssen, under a
Creative Commons licence.
1) According to my notes, there was a fair bit of background chatter in the courtroom at the
time: so either he didnt finish sentence or I didnt catch it (the former, I think).
2) She actually said he, but Im guessing that was a mistranslation by the interpreter that led
to her misunderstanding what the judge said. Im pretty sure I heard both the judge and the
interpreter correctly.

32. Missing documents

Defence lawyers in the Belgian trial of Scientology raised the

question of documents presented to the prosecutor but missing
from the court's files.

Myriam Z.* had been on the stand for a good couple of hours, during which Judge Yves
Rgimont had questioned her closely about both sides of the case.
She was the only individual defendant to have been charged in connection with both of the
investigations that had been folded into this prosecution.
As quickly as she had answered one question, the judge confronted her with accounts from
former plaintiffs that often contradicted her version. As the morning wore on, she seemed
increasingly to be on the back-foot. (1)
Soon however, the defence would get a chance to redress the balance.
First, the judge turned to the prosecutor, Jean-Pascal Thoreau. Did he have any questions? He
did not.
Thoreau, by his own admission, was really only present to provide back-up to his colleague,
Christophe Caliman, who had followed the case from the beginning. But Caliman, as Thoreau
had announced to the court at the start of proceedings that morning, was absent, sick. He was
still trying to find out how serious it was. (2)
So the judge gave the floor to Myriams lawyer, Matre Johan Scheers.
Matre Scheers starting by returning to the issue of refunds, something the judge had asked
her about earlier. She had explained that she had handled refunds for dissatisfied member and
there had been mention of a Monsieur M. who had asked for a refund. Did she know why he
had asked for his money back, he asked?
Yes, said Myriam. He had tax problems, and I did the necessary to get his money refunded
from all the churches, because normally he had to go to them.
The first time I met him was in the office with his lawyer, and he refused the money. He was
in touch with the police. Monsieur Lesciauskas [the chief investigator] had insisted that he file
a complaint.
And were there many such requests?
There were certainly not a lot of requests, said Myriam. Generally, things went well.
I would like to say something about those jobs, she added, referring to the affair of the job
adverts about which she had just been questioned closely by the judge. (The main thrust of
the original complaint was that the original ads had given the impression that paid work was
on offer.)
Mme V. and I intervened several times to correct mistakes and nobody came to complain to
me," said Myriam.
My aim has always been to inform people so that they knew where they were and what it
was they were about to do. There were always a lot of people who left: that is normal in
voluntary work.

But you had to sign on for two and a half years, said Judge Rgimont. He appeared to be
referring to the staff contracts.
But people were free to leave when they wanted. said Myriam.
Two and a half years, the judge repeated.
If people didnt want to stay, they didnt, said Myriam.
Matre Scheers stepped in again. He asked about the BZ family, who had filed a complaint in
the original investigation. Earlier in the trial, the judge had questioned another defendant,
Hilde N. about their grievances. (She had suggested that, at least for some matters, he might
be better advised asking Myriam.)
Myriam said she had only seen them from time to time; that when they had asked for a refund,
she had not heard about it at the time; that she had learned subsequently that their request had
been refused.
Her lawyer also tackled her failure on occasion to answer precise questions during the police
investigation. He wanted to give her a chance to explain.
Sometimes people ask you questions, such as who was a member of the association between
one date and another and I cant answer, said Myriam. So she had asked at the time if she
could answer in writing. Accordingly, they had submitted a number of documents to correct
false information.
But these documents had not made it into the case files, she added.
That rang a bell with Judge Rgimont. He thought he recalled references to the documents in
question in some of the case files.

For Scientology, Matre Vanderveeren seemed persuaded that

some documents presented to the prosecutor were indeed
important. But these are not available to you, he told the
judge.
Matre Scheers also suggested that there might be some confusion over her role in the Church
of Scientology at the time: while she had been Director of Special Affairs, she was not
director of the Church at the time, but its president.
The defendant was welcome to try to clear this up, said the judge, but he had been astonished
to hear her say that the president did not handle the day-to-day running of the Church, when
earlier she had said the opposite in relation to a previous holder of the post (fellow defendant
Vincent G.).
The defence lawyers tried to parse this for a while. Myriams account had not struck them the
same way and they were clearly anxious that the judge not read too much into what he
thought were discrepancies in her testimony.

But they were also concerned that certain documents relating to the prosecutors questioning
of Myriam client did not appear in the file. Matre Pascal Vanderveeren, the lawyer for the
Church of Scientology itself, intervened on that matter.
Thoreau, for the prosecution, asked the defendant if these interviews with the prosecutor has
happened spontaneously or had she been arrested.
On her own initiative, said Myriam: Because we thought that there were things in the file
that we should correct.
If someone comes of their own initiative, that perhaps explains why there was no written
trace, Thoreau suggested.
Judge Rgimont had the clerk make a formal note. Mme Z. explains that she met on her own
initiative with the prosecutor handling the file, Monsieur Caliman, and that she gave him
documents to point errors she said were in the file: things that were not correct about the
religion of Scientology.
So were these documents in the case files, the judge asked? It was not clear.
Matre Quentin Wauters, the lawyer for another defendant, Marc B., stepped forward to say
that his client too had, at his own initiative, gone to the prosecutor to give him documents
relating to the case. At Wauters request, the judge had the clerk note that too.
And were these documents in the file, the judge asked?
Another defence lawyer, Matre Cedric Vergauwen, stepped forward to say that while
prosecutor Caliman had at some point talked about certain documents having been found, that
rather suggested that at some point they had been lost.
Thoreau bristled: what kind of files were we talking about here? If it was just a few books,
that was one thing, he said (but if it was something that actually mattered, that was another, he
seemed to be implying).
He wanted some kind of indication that if there was something missing, it actually had a
bearing on key issues.
Matre Vanderveeren seemed persuaded that the documents that Marc B. had presented to the
prosecutor were indeed important. But these are not available to you, he told the judge. It
was an issue he was to return to in his closing arguments.
Further discussion only seemed to confused matters, with one defence lawyer intervening
when the judge appeared to mistake one set of documents for another. Certainly, it was not
always clear which set was being discussed.
All this time, Myriam Z. stood ready to answer further questions, but by now the debate had
moved from her to technical matters. The court broke up for lunch and she was able to stand
down.
Now, there was only one defendant present who had not yet been questioned by the judge.
That was the order of business for the afternoon session.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Photo: Empty book by Lionel Allonge, reproduced under a GNU Free Documentation
Licence.

33. Recruiting for the Ideal Org

Jobs ads that led people into thinking there was paid work on
offer were posted as part of a recruitment drive, the Belgian
trial of Scientology heard.
The last of the defendants to be questioned by the judge was Jeannine V.
Like her fellow defendant Myriam Z. who had been questioned that morning, she had been
charged in connection with the job adverts Scientology had posted in the local press.
Many of those who had applied subsequently told investigators that while they had applied for
what they thought was a salaried position, there was no paid work to be had.
Jeannine V. had been charged because at the time the ads were placed, back in 2007, she had
been the executive director of the Church of Scientology Belgium. The president then was
Myriam Z.
There had already been some confusion that morning as to exactly who did what in the
Church. So Judge Yves Rgimont started by asking exactly what her responsibilities had been
at that time.
I handled the proper functioning of the church, she said, coordinating with the different
executives to make sure the parishioners got their services.
That is the religious aspect, said the judge. But when I asked Mme Z. about her role as
president, why did she not know about the hiring of these people?

Personally, I dont know exactly what her role was, Jeannine said of her fellow defendant.
I was only interested in seeing her about legal affairs.
So who took care of the everyday running? the judge asked.
I was head of the Church of Scientology Belgium and ensured that everything ran properly,
she replied.
As was his habit for what he thought were key points, Judge Rgimont had his clerk make a
formal note of the response.
When someone in the Church of Scientology decides to put an ad in two papers announcing
that the Church of Scientology is looking for administrative workers, you know about this,
yes? (1)
Yes, said Jeannine: she did. The judge had the clerk note that down too.
So whose idea had this venture been?
Jeannine explained that the idea in the Church of Scientology was to develop what were
known as Ideal Orgs (Ideal Organisations), or ideal churches. In 2005, it had been announced
that the Church of Scientology Belgium would become an ideal church.
The Ideal Org is one that doesnt just have a lot of people but where a lot of people can come
to learn about the religion, she added.
An Ideal Org has a lot of members and we didnt have enough, she added. We were
trying to get more Scientologists to be active members and there were not enough
parishioners. (By parishioners, she meant ordinary members paying for services rather than
those on staff.)
It was important in the future to have an ideal church, she added. The fact that Brussels was
to become an Ideal Org had even been announced at an international event.
So you were given an objective: that the Church of Scientology Belgium become an ideal
Church, said the judge.
Yes, said Jeannine: in 2005, (the year the announcement had been made).

The ad was legally correct... but perhaps not very clear...,

she said. But we never, never, never forced anyone to stay.
For the Church to be promoted in this manner, one of the criterion was to have x number of
active members, the judge concluded.
Is that not the world turned upside down? he asked. Would it not be better to look for a
Church that better fit the bill and say they would be an Ideal Org?
Not necessarily, said Jeannine. There were sometimes little churches.

So that implies that a church that is put forward by the international officials says You are
going to have the label of quality. So you say Great, but you dont have enough members
so you create parishioners?
Yes, said Jeannine.
That is strange, though, said the judge. Because according to the doctrine of Scientology,
you are members of the Church, you believe in the principles of Scientology, so you become a
member: that is the normal process.
So is it not contradictory to go to the outside world with an advert with absolutely no
mention of Scientology? To approach people on the outside who want to work, but who dont
necessarily want to be Scientologists? Isnt that contradictory?
When we placed the ad then people came and people knew that it was Church of
Scientology, said Jeannine. There was a panel that said so at the entrance, and I made sure
people knew where it was.
From the beginning people knew that it was the Church of Scientology, and if they wanted to
leave they were free to do so, and it was not about hiding anything. It was about our
philosophy that was the aim.
But that is not what people were telling us, said the judge.
I will explain it, said Jeannine.
Yes, said the judge. You were right in the middle of this...
These people were not happy, said Jeannine. When I was director of the Church, a lot of
people were happy to work for us and there was only a complaint from one woman who was
promised 700 euros and I said No thats not possible, that is for members of staff
And when they realised the ad was not clear, they changed it, she added.
But then you put exactly the same ad in the main daily, in another section, said the judge.
And people turned up looking for work. There were some who signed membership forms
who didnt want to and others who worked for nothing.
The first ads had run in the summer of 2007, he noted. They were corrected in February of
2008: eight months later. You say that you corrected things, but you didnt, he added.
The ad was legally correct, yes, but perhaps not very clear, said Jeannine. But when people
if people wanted to go, they could, and perhaps half the people left after seeing the film. But
we never, never, never forced anyone to stay.
It was clear that there was not a salary, that there was never a salary, she added.
Judge Rgimont produced another court document.
He reminder her that earlier, Mme Z. had said that once someone left, that was it: you left
them alone. But another disillusioned job-seeker, Monsieur S. had told investigators that he

would get phone calls from the Church of Scientology from time to time asking him to come
back.
These calls came from different people but notably from Jeannine herself, said the judge.

No, said the judge. Thats not what he said You say
white and this man says black, or near enough.
This gentleman was working in the Church for a few months and I often spoke to this
gentleman, and what he says now I find a little astonishing, she replied. Perhaps I contacted
him to ask how he was
No, said the judge. Thats not what he said. He said you wanted him to buy more books.
You say white and this man says black, or near enough.
Judge Rgimont took her back to what she had said earlier. You said this was voluntary
work, he reminded her. But this Monsieur S. had told investigators that no one had ever said
it was voluntary work.
That astonishes me, said Jeannine.
Her lawyer, Matre Pierre Monville, intervened. He went back on several parts of his
declaration, he pointed out. The gentlemans status was illegal, he added, ...so his position
can be called into question.
That it is an element, the judge conceded. But it is not just one person but several people.
Nevertheless, said Matre Monville, given its specific nature but that hit a nerve with the
judge.
Perhaps he should change his way of conducting the trial, he asked rhetorically: just check the
names and addresses and go to legal arguments. He was referring to objections some defence
lawyers had raised earlier to the way he had chosen to question the defendants. (He had not
been happy then, either.)
For a week now, the defence had been complaining about one thing or another, said the judge.
And now you question elements from the file?
In 15 years he had never had any remarks about his way of working. Who is leading the
debate? He was visibly irritated now.
The defence would get its chance to argue its case, he said, but in the meantime, they needed
to stop telling him what he could use in the case files.
And now he produced another document, for the lawyer's benefit.
Matre Monville, said the judge. This is Madame V.s declaration. And he read from a
summary of an interview his client had had with investigators.

Why, they wanted to know, had she had job-seekers sign a document that said: I declare my
allegiance to the Church of Scientology?
This is what she replied, said the judge: I suppose we must have made a mistake.
So Mme Z. was blaming Mme V., said the judge, and Mme V. was blaming Mme Z....
Jeannine tried to answer. In February two thousand but, overcome with emotion, she could
not complete her sentence. By now she was in tears.
There was a pause while she took time to recover her composure, and when she was ready,
she explained.
In February 2012, I was arrested by Danish police and put in prison, and the investigating
judge detained me for 10 days and I could not speak to any of my Scientology colleagues and
I was so ill-at-ease.
She was forbidden to speak to anyone she said. She felt her religion was being destroyed.
And perhaps I said things I should not have said, I dont know if what I said was right or
not," she added.
The federal police, she explained, had contacted her twice and she had said that she wanted
questions in writing. And then I was arrested and detained.
Madame, said the judge. When you are summoned once, twice, three times and you dont
come, are you surprised that he has you arrested?

It was clearly said that it was not a work contract, she

insisted. So all 161 people misunderstood, said the judge.
But had been waiting for an answer to her letter, she said. I had my work in Copenhagen.
So what you are saying is you were not behaving unreasonably, said the judge.
It was difficult for me, said the defendant.
Bien, said the judge which suggested he was ready to move on.
People say it was you who gave the orders, he told her.
Not necessarily, no, said Jeannine.
Once more, he referred her to the accounts given by the job applicants: they said they had
been led to believe they were applying for paid work, which it was not; it was not even
administrative work, as advertised; and some people felt that they had been pressured into
working when they did not want to.

He raised the example of a Monsieur B. who had been put to work in the Scientology
bookshop along with some other recruits. I wanted to leave because, after three weeks I had
been paid 30 euros, he told investigators.
Jeannine told me, Jeannine told me, said the judge. Thats a lot of people who didnt
know that they were not going to be paid.
I remember this gentleman vaguely, said Jeannine. He came from time to time but very
irregularly and I looked after the bills because I handled the books and if he needed me he
came to me.
No, said the judge. He came to see you because he did not want to do sales. Perhaps he is
talking nonsense.
He picked up another account from a job-seeker: and this ladys status was not illegal, he
added pointedly: nor had she ever gone back on her account.
She had answered the advert in Vlams and been put to work on the phones, organising
appointments for the next wave of respondents.
She later told investigators: I remember that I told some people who came towards the end
not to come, that it was a scam."
And this, said the judge, was from someone who was supposed to have been convinced to
become a volunteer.
Jeannine protested that she had never tried to hide anything. If she signed a membership
declaration, it was because she wanted to, she added.
But all these people thought they were signing a work contract: that is what they are all
saying, said Judge Rgimont.
Jeannine did not accept that. It was clearly said that it was not a work contract, she insisted.
So all 161 people misunderstood, said the judge.
All these people were free to leave, even if they had signed for two and a half years, she
replied.
Judge Rgimont quoted another job-seekers statement. This person asked me to clean the
faade of the church. I refused and she got angry.
I think that is a bit exaggerated, said Jeannine.
Matre Monville also stood up. We should not generalise. Things are more nuanced, he
said.
That is what Ive been hearing from the beginning, said the judge. He awaited the defence
arguments with impatience, he added. Because frankly, at this stage phtt!
What does that mean? asked one of the defence lawyers, ready to take umbrage.

That I await your explanations, the judge replied. And with that, he adjourned the hearing.
* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choose
not to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to wait
until the judgment. It seems reasonable to respect that practice.
Photo: "Galeries de faade du palais de Justice de Bruxelles" by Jean Houssen, under a
Creative Commons licence.

34. The Religion Defence

An expert in religious law told the Belgian trial that

Scientology had to be considered a religion and the e-meter
a religious artefact.
Only the defence called witnesses at the Belgian trial of Scientology.
Four of them were practising Scientologists who wanted to testify to all the good their Church
had done them. Their message to the court would be perfectly clear: that it could not dismiss
the fact that Scientology was a religion.

And to hammer that point home the defence produced an expert witness with impeccable
credentials.
At the end of the first week of the trial, Professor Marco Ventura took the stand. He
introduced himself as a professor of Canonical Law and the Law of Religions at the
University of Siena, in Italy.
In the course of his career he had also held posts or conducted research at University College
of London, Berkeley University in California, the Universit Libre in Brussels, as well as in
India, Morocco, France, Vietnam and elsewhere.
Fluent in three languages, widely published and with an impressive range of international
posts behind him, this was no lightweight taking the stand. (1)
Professor Ventura was dressed smartly in a dark grey suit and carried a file of notes that, in
the end, he never needed to consult. He gave his testimony, in flawless, if slightly accented
French.
No, he was not a Scientologist, he said in answer to a preliminary question from Judge Yves
Rgimont; nor had he ever been. The judge invited him to set out his position.
The key question was this, said Professor Ventura: when one talks about religion, can one
speak of Scientology being a religion? From a legal position, the answer was unequivocally
yes.
European institutions such as the Council of Europe and the European Union had a broad
definition of what constitutes a religion, he explained. This inclusive definition is all the
more important because for these institutions it brings with it the protection that religious
rights entail.
One could identify three common criteria for a religion, he said: one was simply autodefinition, a concept set out in several texts. Auto-definition simply meant that you regarded
your movement as a religion.
As soon as there was auto-definition, he said, the burden of proof fell on a movements
detractors to prove that it was not a religion.

The fact that a new religious movement does not resemble

the old ones does not mean it is not what it says it is, said
Professor Ventura
The second criterion related to freedom of religion or belief: and there, he said, European law
offered a broad interpretation.
There has to be a distinction between the form of traditional religions and the new religious
movements, he said. And the fact that a new religious movement does not resemble the old
ones does not mean it is not what it says it is.

So new religious movements were entitled to the same rights as the traditional denominations,
he argued.
Then, said the professor, you had to look at the substantial criteria, which is to say the
contents of the movement in question. They are the manifestations of religion, he explained.
These substantial criteria included the rituals, the religious objects, the practices and teachings
of a movement. The definition, as set down in European law was very long, he added, but that
was what it came down to. There is more, but I dont have the time for it all, he added.
Another important element, for European institutions at least, was the question of
organisation. To accomplish these aims, the church must be organised, he said.
That helped the Church meet test of diversity, which is to say it reflected a spiritual
experience that had a broad vision of the world, a doctrine on which its practices depended.
In the context of the trial then, the key question was: does Scientology meet these criteria? For
him, the answer was yes.
What is interesting from the outside, for an expert, is one finds aspects that are modern as
well as traditional; and aspects representing new forms of religion that meet the diversity
criterion, he added.
One could also answer yes to the religion question by virtue of what one found in European
jurisprudence: by how Scientology had been regarded in previous court rulings.
He cited a European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruling on an action that Scientology had
brought against Sweden in 1979. That was a landmark case not just because it was the first
time that Scientology had been permitted to bring an action as a church; it was the first time
any church had been allowed to file a case as a church. (2)
He also noted a 1997 ruling by Germanys Federal Administrative Court that had said that the
fact that there were payments for services was not of itself an argument against the religious
character of Scientology. (3)
And he said that a 2013 Amsterdam court ruling that said auditing and Scientology were
comparable with ecclesiastical activities in other religions. That debate isnt closed, but
subsequent rulings havent put that in question, he added. (4)
Another reason Scientology should be accepted as a religion was the notion of community, he
said.
Up until now, he said, he had been talking about the notion of community. But European
institutions referred to organisations, said Professor Ventura.
It was important to understand that religious communities were recognised as moral persons
in international law, he explained. Freedom of religion, freedom of belief also entailed the
right to organise oneself as one wished: so these freedoms also covered religious
communities.

Insofar as it is recognised as a religion, then we recognise that it is a religion in the eyes of

European institutions, he added. In the United Kingdom, it is not just recognised as a
community, but since 2013 it can celebrate marriages that are recognised in civil

The ethics system does not have as its aim taking people out
of their legal obligations: it is a quite different sphere, said
the professor.
Matre Pascal Vanderveeren, the Church of Scientologys lawyer, asked him about the role of
ethics and discipline in religions and how that applied in the context of Scientology.
When you see how religions structure themselves, one can note that there is always a system
of control in place, said Professor Ventura. That affects the behaviour of the individual and
the group in the heart of the community: so for example, a monastery in the Catholic Church.
This had important implications, he said. The State will never go into the conscience of a
person whereas a religion is there precisely for that. And depending on the community
concerned, those controls could be very invasive, he added.
These controls systems were structured in very different ways from religion to religion, he
said. In the Catholic Church, for example, a book of the canon law code deals with criminal
law, whereas in the Protestant Church it was more a disciplinary code.
And these are very important choices of words, he added. Judaism, Islam; all the major
religions had their system, their criminal code.
All these things act at a level that is not at the level of the state: that is very important, he
continued. It is obvious that the Catholic Church is not in competition with the state, but that
is always true with ordinary religions.
Judge Rgimont stopped him: Isnt any religion, whatever it is, nevertheless obliged to
respect the law in that country?
Of course, the professor replied. Every religion had a doctrine to that effect, he said.
Jewish law is very clear on that point. Obviously, in whatever religion you are talking about
there is the necessity that they acknowledge the need to respect the laws of the country.
But from a human rights perspective, while the same system that acknowledged the primacy
of the state also allowed for a judgment as to whether or not the state was encroaching on the
rights of a religion.
It is the state, or supranational law, that ensures that freedom of religion is respected, he
said. And the ECHR was the final court of appeal for most European countries.
It was important to note then that there were mechanisms in place to check the conformity of
state laws with Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights to ensure that states
did not excessively restrain these freedoms. (Article 9 guarantees freedom of thought,
conscience and religion.)

He raised the example of Scientologys experience in Russia: the ECHR had ruled three times
against Moscow over its treatment of the Church there. (5)
As an outside observer, it seemed to him that the Church of Scientology met the criteria of a
religion in this respect too. But it was important to look at its function from the inside too, he
added: The ethics system does not have as its aim taking people out of their legal
obligations: it is a quite different sphere.

One question worth asking was: if Scientologys activities

were to be stopped, why them and not similar cases involving
other religions?
Matre Vanderveeren asked him about the issue of sacred, or ritual objects in religions. Did
Scientologys e-meter qualify? (The e-meter, or electropsychometer, is a device used in
Scientology auditing, which they characterise as spiritual counselling.)
The answer was yes, said Professor Ventura: for two reasons. First, it was a question of what
the community believed and lived.
And second, he said: I dont see how you can accept other objects such as the rosary and not
the e-meter I cant see the objective elements to set the e-meter apart from others without
falling into discrimination.
Jean-Pascal Thoreau, the prosecutor assisting Christophe Caliman with his case, intervened.
He could understand that point in relation to say, Scientologys distinctive eight-pointed
cross, he said. But could one not make a distinction between that and the e-meter?
Could one not also argue that sacred objects were not available to everyone? And was there
not a distinction between a symbol and a ritual? Surely a cross could be both.
Caliman agreed with his colleague and thought he had put his finger on something important.
Can one say that the e-meter, when it is used for a confessional, is it being used in a religious
way?
Judge Rgimont put a slightly different question: could the e-meter be put to a use that
deviated from its original function?
That depends on how it is used, said the professor.
He cited the case of a Coptic Christian who had won a case against Britain in the European
Court of Human Rights after British Airways, her employers, had prevented her from wearing
a cross at work. (6) The principle is that any restriction will be tested on strict conditions of
admissibility, he said.
Thoreau tried again. Religious objects have the meaning the community wants them to have.
Can it have different meanings inside the church?
Generally, he said, the courts tried to avoid speculation as to how a religion worked, said
Professor Ventura. There have been cases in which national convictions have been

overturned because they were based on what the court thought a religious activity meant, he
added.
He appeared to be referring to ECHR rulings overturning judgments at the national level: the
lesson seemed to be that you could not second-guess what a religion might mean. In 2003, the
Jehovahs Witnesses had won a case against France at the Strasbourg court over their refusal
to allow blood transfusions. (7)
So on that logic, you could not second-guess Scientology on what you thought the e-meter
was being used for: what mattered was what Scientology thought the e-meter was.
Caliman, for the prosecution, was still not convinced. Is this, perhaps, the wrong debate?
Interesting in theory, but we are concerned with the facts.
The expert was simply doing his job, Judge Rgimont pointed out. But he wanted more
guidance from Professor Ventura as to the distinction between the doctrine and the actual
lived experience of a religion.
Professor Ventura argued there was a difference between the facts, how they were perceived
and who suffered as a consequence. So the court needed to keep in mind what impact any
ruling would have on the Church of Scientology.
In Switzerland, for example, police had arrested some people for handing out tracts
supporting the Islamic Salvation Front in Algeria. They were detained and eventually
convicted. There had been a debate over whether that had been necessary.
The same questions needed to be asked in the context of Scientology, measured against the
principle of discrimination. And one question worth asking was: if Scientologys activities
were to be stopped, why them and not similar cases involving other religions?

Sacred objects: I dont see how you can accept other objects
such as the rosary and not the e-meter...
Caliman referred to the testimony of one of the defendants who had said that the e-meter did
nothing of itself. What matters is the person using it and interpreting it, and it is the auditor
who uses his knowledge and experience. (8)
So my question is: could one not distinguish between the act of healing and the act of faith?
If someone heals or lays on hands by prayer, he does nothing himself, but is the instrument of
God, and is there not a parallel here?
Is the e-meter for example, not similar, because the e-meter doesnt do the work. Surely, he
argued, Article 9 could not be used to protect the use of an e-meter that violated the law.
For Professor Ventura, given the diverse ways in which holy objects were used, ...I dont see
a substantial difference between an e-meter and any other object.
Another defence lawyer, Matre Cedric Vergauwen stood up. I dont think we are missing
the debate, as the prosecutor suggested, given the questions put to the defendants.

Matre Vergauwen and other members of the defence team had intervened earlier that week
on just this matter. They had objected to the way the judge had asked some defendants about
the e-meter, arguing that he should show more respect for what Scientologists considered a
religious artefact. (9)
Does the fact that the e-meters are sometimes very expensive undermine the argument that
they are religious objects? he asked.
No, said the professor: not if that was part of the doctrine of the religion.
Would it be comparable to a Muslim paying for a prayer rug, Matre Vergauwen asked.
Professor Ventura was not sure that this counted as a religious object, but he added: If a
Christian paid a fortune for a relic, that wouldnt conform with the Catholic religions
values.
Another defence lawyer, Matre Ines Wouters, stood up. Could Scientologys Preclear files be
considered religious in the same way?
Certainly, Professor replied, in the sense that they have a function in the religious
community. Again, he said, it came back to the principle of auto-definition.
European law is very general, so as to avoid having to make restrictive rulings.
Accordingly, the courts took these issues on a case-by-case basis.
So the line between teaching and practice is fluid, Matre Wouters concluded.
For Professor Ventura, the important thing to bear in mind was that European institutions had
accepted that the secular authorities had only a limited appreciation of these matters. Any
cases affecting religious practice should not be judged in too restrictive a manner, he said.
The judge thanked Professor Ventura for his exposition and he stepped down to make way for
the four Scientologists who were there to bear witness to their faith.

Professor Venturas testimony flagged up the legal obstacles

that lay ahead if the court decided to convict the Church.
The last hour or two had been anything but academic.
For decades now, Scientologists and their lawyers had denounced attacks on its practices in
the courts as religious persecution. It was one thing to hear them insist that Scientology was a
legitimate religion; it was quite another to hear it from an expert in the field.
A few weeks later, as expected, the prosecutor Caliman asked for the dissolution of the
Church of Scientology Belgium, which he accused of being a criminal organisation. The
defence had seen that coming.
Scientologys decision to bring Professor Ventura in to testify was a way of flagging up the
obstacles that lay ahead if the court decided to convict the Church.

It was a reminder that whatever the Belgian court might think about Scientology, it would be
well advised to consider the position of the European Court of Human Rights on religious
questions.
Professor Venturas testimony the religious argument in all its applications was a
cornerstone of their defence.

Judgment in this case is due on Friday, March 11.

Photo of the 2013 model of the Scientology E-Meter by "Colliric", used under a Creative
Commons licence.

35. Success Stories

Four Scientologists appeared as defence witnesses to testify to

all the good their Church had done for them.
Four Scientologists presented themselves to the court at the end of the first week of the Belgian trial.
Each of them said they had come forward, at their own initiative to bear witness to all good that their
faith had done for them.

But their testimony also served in part to reframe the context of the debate so far.
Practices such as the Purification Rundown and Scientology auditing had been presented in
their most negative light by the prosecution.
For the prosecutor, the Rundown, which involves taking large doses of vitamins and minerals,
doing aerobic exercises and spending extended periods in saunas, constitutes the illegal
practice of medicine.
Auditing, which Scientologists describe as a kind of spiritual counselling in which the auditee
discusses often very personal details of their life too, was also problematic from the
prosecutors point of view.

Part of the problem was that the often intimate details of these interviews were subsequently
stored in what were known as Preclear, or PC files. For the prosecution, the storage of such
sensitive information constituted a violation of Belgiums strict privacy laws.
So for the defence, the point of hearing from these witnesses was to make it clear to the court
that whatever disgruntled former members might allege plenty of ordinary Scientologists
still thought the world of their religion.
Two of those who spoke were from the French-speaking community in Belgium; and two
from the Flemish speakers. None of the four were members of staff, but parishioners; ordinary
members who paid for their courses.
They introduced themselves as Evelyne Decavele, a 43-year-old business rep; Frdric
Abcassis, a 51-year-old businessman; 59-years-old Yves Paternoster; and Ria Claessens, a
52-year-old independent consultant.
Matre Pascal Vanderveeren, who was defending the Church of Scientology itself, led the
questioning. The first thing he asked was simply: What has Scientology done for you?
I found Scientology 10 years ago, said Evelyne Decavele, a small woman with dark, short
hair in a boyish cut.
She had been given a book, Dianetics, by a client. I thought it was something new that gave
me answers, and I asked my client to take me to a service, she added.
What I can say is that I got a tranquility of spirit, she said. And yes, she said in answer to a
follow-up question, she had done the Purification Rundown; and she had taken auditing both
with and without an e-meter.
The essential question is now I am in Scientology, I can experiment with my spiritual
nature, she added. All these things I have done for 10 years have helped me understand
myself better and have given me an inner peace for me and for the people around me."
Frdric Abecassis explained that he had got involved with Scientology back in the mid-80s
through a Scientologist friend. After reading a couple of books, he wanted to learn more, he
said.
He admitted that at first he had been apprehensive because of the things he had heard about
Scientology. But he did a course, read more books, took other services and gradually became
more interested.

I feel better and better: in the beginning I was looking for

something spiritual, and Scientology met my needs: answers at
a spiritual level.
Yes, he said, he had done the Rundown and had been audited using an e-meter (the court had
just heard from another defence witness, an expert in religious law who had said that
Scientologys electropsychometer could certainly be considered a religious object).

I have always been interested by spirituality, he said: his father was Jewish, his mother
Catholic. I got the answers to the questions I was asking myself, he added, referring to his
time in Scientology. And while he had spent two and a half years on staff in the late 80searly 90s, he was now just an ordinary parishioner.
Yves Paternoster, a tall, bearded man, said he had got involved in 1983 after coming across
the book Dianetics and doing some courses. He bought an e-meter after deciding to become
an auditor. And yes, he had done the Rundown.
I feel better and better, he said. In the beginning I was looking for something spiritual, and
Scientology met my needs: answers at a spiritual level.
Ria Claessens, a bespectacled woman with light, short hair told the court: Since I was little I
was interested in spiritual questions. I asked questions like Where do we come from? and
Where are we going?.
I was looking, looking, and finally I found a book, Dianetics so I went to a Church and
spent two hours talking, and this lady was very nice to me so I started a course.
All this was in 1992, she added and yes, she had done the Rundown and she had received
auditing.
And what had she got from Scientology? I have got a lot out of it insofar as I have had a lot
of answers to the questions that I asked. Relations with her family and at her work had also
improved, she added.
Yes, she said, she had an e-meter, and in fact was training to be an auditor.
Matre Vanderveeren asked them if, in all the years they had spent inside Scientology, they
had ever experienced any constraints. The question of constraints how far Scientology
interfered in the private lives of its members had been at the heart of the debates that week.
In 10 years I have never felt any constraints, said Decavele. In fact, the spiritual experiences
she had had in Scientology had only made her want to do more, to go further, she added.
When the judge had asked about the contents of the ethics files, defendants had told him that
it could contain positive notes as well as a record of acts requiring disciplinary measures.
Decavele confirmed this: My ethics file is fairly full of letters of thanks for the help that I
have given, she said.
Abecassis response was much the same. I have never noticed any pressure in my experience
of Scientology. In the nearly 30 years he had been a Scientologists, there had been times
when he was not present much and sometimes not at all, for long periods. I have never had
any pressure regarding that, he added.
I have an ethics file because that is part of the procedure, he added. In his case, it had notes
pointing out that he had sometimes arrived late, ...and I had notes from the people who had
to wait for me, he said to laughter in the courtroom.
But I have also had positive notes for my activities in fact much more than negative ones.

Constraints are not part of my universe, said one

Scientologist
For Yves Paternoster, the answer was very simple. Constraints are not part of my universe,
and if I felt them in Scientology I would no longer be part of Scientology.
One of the aims of the Church, he said, was to restore ones self-determinism. So I dont see
how there could be constraints: that seems to me to illogical.
As for his ethics file, he said, he did have one and it was quite empty. I arrive on time as I
am fairly punctual The ethics file exists with my consent, and I know its contents, he
stressed.
No said Claessens, she had not experienced any constraints or pressure in Scientology. I
know I have an ethics file. I know its contents, and it has negative points in it but a lot
positives points too.
And what did they think about the cost of Scientology courses, said Matre Vanderveeren.
The donations I make correspond absolutely with what I get out of it, said Decavele and
she reckoned she spent 4-5,000 euros year.
I get something in return, she explained. It is not material, but it is so enriching spiritually,
I cant express it.
Ideally, said Abecassis, these kinds of things would be free, but given the material reality,
it is not possible.
But in any case, he added, the money they paid helped those people who were doing
humanitarian work and social campaigning on behalf of Scientology.
Yves Paternoster said that when he gave to Scientology it was in the spirit of building the
Church. The religious work I think really has something to give to humanity, so the meaning
of my contribution is to bring something to humanity."
It was perhaps true that the price was high, but he gave his contributions with a light heart, he
said, ...and in the same spirit as the first Christians formed their first Church.
There is no constraint, he added. It is a free act.
Ria Claessens said that if she paid money to Scientology is was to help build her religion. She
calculated that during her time as a member she had paid around 1,000 euros a year.
I have always had a lot of admiration for those who do something for humanity, she said. I
have not had the chance to do this kind of thing, so I want to contribute in my way.
And did they, Matre Vanderveeren asked, feel that they were part of a criminal organisation?
This was the most serious charge in the indictment against the Church, one which carried a
possible penalty of dissolution.

All I can add, said Evelyne Decavele, is that this is the reason I am here: to contest that
accusation. The others confirmed that this too had been their main reason for coming to court
to testify.
The prosecutor, Christophe Caliman, had a question: did the witnesses have the feeling that
they were giving evidence without any constraints?
Ria Claessens made it clear that she had asked if she could testify and the others concurred.
But supposing they had something to denounce concerning Scientology, Caliman said. Could
they do so without being sanctioned by the Church?

I can say what I like about the Church and I am certainly not
punished for that.
Evelyne Decavele said she had no problems with the Church. Claessens insisted: I can say
what I like about the Church and I am certainly not punished for that.
So were they, asked Caliman, familiar with the March 17, 1965 Hubbard policy letter listing
Suppressive Acts, which is to say high crimes against Scientology?
The list included:
public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology
Organizations;
testifying as a hostile witness against Scientology in public;
reporting or threatening to report Scientology or Scientologists to civil authorities;
bringing civil suit against any Scientology organization or Scientologist;
bringing criminal action
Do they know anything about that? asked the prosecutor. And if so, what do they think?
Decavele said she did not know what Monsieur le Procureur was referring to. I am not
aware of that. All I can say is that I am here of my own free will to defend my religion, and I
have nothing further to add.
Paternoster said he found the question a bit academic, because he knew they respected the
law.
And if someone was in conflict with the Church of Scientology, they would already be
outside the movement, so how could Scientology punish them? I cant see how that could
apply, he added.
Abecassis took a similar view. If I really had something against them [Scientology], I would
not want to stay to debate with them, he said. I would go to the authorities.

Claessens, a Flemish-speaker, said she had nothing to say because the text was in French
...and I didnt understand the question".
It was late Friday afternoon now, dark outside. More than a few people were anxious to get
away for the weekend, and the autumn break.
Just a few minutes earlier, someone had been whistling loudly outside the courtroom, the
sound echoing through the by-now mostly empty Palais de Justice.
Rgimont, rather than sending an officer to chastise the offender, had simply remarked
Someones already on holiday, which relieved the mounting torpor.
Now, he said: "Javance dangereusement," but did anyone have any further questions?
Nobody did.
Judge Rgimont adjourned the proceedings and everybody filed out of near deserted
courthouse.
Photo: PGC 29194 (Antlia Dwarf) galaxy by Hubble space telescope, by NASA