The American state of Louisiana ordered the Ten commandments of God to be displayed in all classrooms of the state’s educational institutions, the world agencies reported.
A local ordinance dictates that the Ten Commandments must be on posters that are large enough — 12 inches by 8 inches — to be easy to read. They will be placed from kindergartens to universities.
The law was drafted by representatives of the Republican Party, which holds a two-thirds majority of the seats in both houses of the Louisiana legislature. The posters will be funded through donations and no government funds will be used for them.
According to NGOs, the new law violates the rule of separation of church and state and is a blatant violation of the constitution.
Louisiana is the first and only state with such a law.
A house church in Shunyi, Beijing
Photo by Huang Jinhui
.CC BY-SA 4.0
Persecution of Christians in China is increasing and spreading to Hong Kong, Release International has warned on the 35th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.
The Tiananmen massacre in Beijing on June 4, 1989 brought a brutal end to pro-democracy protests and marked an increase in anti-Christian repression.
Thirty-five years later, Christians in China face the worst level of persecution since the Cultural Revolution, a trend that has spread to Hong Kong, where draconian national security laws further restrict free speech and religious freedom .
The organization, which supports persecuted Christians around the world, said the new law could force Roman Catholic priests in Hong Kong to reveal the secrets of confession. According to Art. 23, passed in March, priests can be jailed for up to fourteen months if they refuse to reveal so-called “crimes of treason” shared during confession.
Increasing anti-Christian repression forced many Christians to leave Hong Kong and emigrate to the United Kingdom. Christian rights activists say Britain has a moral obligation to uphold religious freedom in its former colony.
“The people of Hong Kong expect the UK to stand firm in defense of their religious freedom and stand up for them, and to take all necessary measures to protect those fleeing persecution,” they said.
A new report by the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) claims that China is increasingly repressing practicing Christians. The report says that religious freedom is the cornerstone of all freedoms and that the current crackdown on Christians in China is the most severe since Mao Zedong’s “Cultural Revolution.” These include harassment and deprivation of rights, disruption of services, baptisms and even online services to intimidate Christians. Heavy fines are imposed on people who rent out Christian places of worship to discourage Christians from gathering for prayer. In 2022, for example, Huang Yuanda, a Christian from Xiamen, was fined 100,000 yuan (about $14,500) by the Ethnic and Religious Affairs Bureau for renting a house to the church school. Numerous anti-Christian regulations have been introduced to monitor Christian information in cyberspace.
He says Chinese censorship efforts especially target Christian youth.
“For the first time, millions of Chinese children were forced to sign a form – these are Christian children – to renounce their faith in public.”
Communist leaders also continue to remove crosses from church buildings. “Even the government-sanctioned churches have been targeted for persecution,” says Fu. “Those pastors who refuse to voluntarily destroy, remove, and demolish their crosses have been facing huge risks of persecution.”
Furthermore, Chinese Christians know their every move is increasingly watched as China embraces digitalized social monitoring.
Fu says, “The government-sanctioned churches, every church pulpit and the four corners of the church have to install face recognition cameras so that they can monitor the congregation – whether there’s any children, there’s any youth under 18 years old, any Communist Party member, any Communist Youth League member, any civil servant, or any police or military service member. These are all forbidden to even enter into the church building.”
Today, the European Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act), the world’s first comprehensive regulation on artificial intelligence, enters into force. The AI Act is designed to ensure that AI developed and used in the EU is trustworthy, with safeguards to protect people’s fundamental rights. The regulation aims to establish a harmonised internal market for AI in the EU, encouraging the uptake of this technology and creating a supportive environment for innovation and investment.
The AI Act introduces a forward-looking definition of AI, based on a product safety and risk-based approach in the EU:
Minimal risk: Most AI systems, such as AI-enabled recommender systems and spam filters, fall into this category. These systems face no obligations under the AI Act due to their minimal risk to citizens’ rights and safety. Companies can voluntarily adopt additional codes of conduct.
Specific transparency risk: AI systems like chatbots must clearly disclose to users that they are interacting with a machine. Certain AI-generated content, including deep fakes, must be labelled as such, and users need to be informed when biometric categorisation or emotion recognition systems are being used. In addition, providers will have to design systems in a way that synthetic audio, video, text and images content is marked in a machine-readable format, and detectable as artificially generated or manipulated.
High risk: AI systems identified as high-risk will be required to comply with strict requirements, including risk-mitigation systems, high quality of data sets, logging of activity, detailed documentation, clear user information, human oversight, and a high level of robustness, accuracy, and cybersecurity. Regulatory sandboxes will facilitate responsible innovation and the development of compliant AI systems. Such high-risk AI systems include for example AI systems used for recruitment, or to assess whether somebody is entitled to get a loan, or to run autonomous robots.
Unacceptable risk: AI systems considered a clear threat to the fundamental rights of people will be banned. This includes AI systems or applications that manipulate human behaviour to circumvent users’ free will, such as toys using voice assistance encouraging dangerous behaviour of minors, systems that allow ‘social scoring’ by governments or companies, and certain applications of predictive policing. In addition, some uses of biometric systems will be prohibited, for example emotion recognition systems used at the workplace and some systems for categorising people or real time remote biometric identification for law enforcement purposes in publicly accessible spaces (with narrow exceptions).
To complement this system, the AI Act also introduces rules for so-called general-purpose AI models, which are highly capable AI models that are designed to perform a wide variety of tasks like generating human-like text. General-purpose AI models are increasingly used as components of AI applications. The AI Act will ensure transparency along the value chain and addresses possible systemic risks of the most capable models.
Member States have until 2 August 2025 to designate national competent authorities, who will oversee the application of the rules for AI systems and carry out market surveillance activities. The Commission’s AI Office will be the key implementation body for the AI Act at EU-level, as well as the enforcer for the rules for general-purpose AI models.
Three advisory bodies will support the implementation of the rules. The European Artificial Intelligence Board will ensure a uniform application of the AI Act across EU Member States and will act as the main body for cooperation between the Commission and the Member States. A scientific panel of independent experts will offer technical advice and input on enforcement. In particular, this panel can issue alerts to the AI Office about risks associated to general-purpose AI models. The AI Office can also receive guidance from an advisory forum, composed of a diverse set of stakeholders.
Companies not complying with the rules will be fined. Fines could go up to 7% of the global annual turnover for violations of banned AI applications, up to 3% for violations of other obligations and up to 1.5% for supplying incorrect information.
Next Steps
The majority of rules of the AI Act will start applying on 2 August 2026. However, prohibitions of AI systems deemed to present an unacceptable risk will already apply after six months, while the rules for so-called General-Purpose AI models will apply after 12 months.
To bridge the transitional period before full implementation, the Commission has launched the AI Pact. This initiative invites AI developers to voluntarily adopt key obligations of the AI Act ahead of the legal deadlines.
The Commission is also developing guidelines to define and detail how the AI Act should be implemented and facilitating co-regulatory instruments like standards and codes of practice. The Commission opened a call for expression of interest to participate in drawing-up the first general-purpose AI Code of Practice, as well as a multi-stakeholder consultation giving the opportunity to all stakeholders to have their say on the first Code of Practice under the AI Act.
Continued independent, evidence-based research produced by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) has been fundamental in shaping the EU’s AI policies and ensuring their effective implementation.
Latin America has always been known for its political landscape and intricate legal systems and few leaders represent the ideals of collaboration and legislative proficiency as well as Elias Ariel Castillo González. With more than thirty-five years dedicated to politics, Castillo is widely recognized for his commitment, honesty and strong leadership qualities. His present position, as the Executive Secretary of the Latin American Parliament (Parlatino) signifies a moment in a career shaped by a steadfast dedication to serving the public. The closest big event supported by Castillo, which will take place in September, aims to united civil society, politics, parliamentarians, academia and media, to join efforts in protecting and advancing freedom of religion or belief.
Elias Castillo’s journey in politics began in Panama, where he quickly ascended the ranks due to his sharp intellect, strategic acumen, and deep connection with the people. His tenure in the National Assembly of Panama is particularly noteworthy, with him being elected as its president on three separate occasions. Such a record is a testament to his leadership skills and the trust he garnered from his peers.
The prestige of his career in Panama naturally extended to the broader Latin American arena. Castillo has been a dedicated member of the Latin American and Caribbean Parliament (Parlatino) for several terms. He served as president of Parlatino three times—a rare achievement that highlights his influence and effectiveness in fostering legislative dialogue and cooperation across national borders.
Leadership in Parlatino
As the Executive Secretary of the Latin American Parliament, Castillo’s role is multifaceted. It involves not only steering the legislative agenda but also ensuring that the diverse interests of member states are represented and reconciled. Under his stewardship, Parlatino has undertaken significant initiatives aimed at enhancing regional integration, promoting democratic governance, and addressing pressing issues such as climate change, human rights, and economic disparity.
Castillo’s leadership is marked by an inclusive approach. He strives to bring together legislators from different political, social, and economic backgrounds, fostering a collaborative environment where comprehensive and sustainable policies can be crafted. His vision extends beyond immediate legislative concerns to encompass long-term regional stability and prosperity.
A Visionary for the Future
One of Castillo’s most commendable traits is his forward-looking vision. He understands that the challenges facing Latin America—be they economic, environmental, or social—require innovative and collaborative approaches. He has been a vocal advocate for leveraging technology in governance, improving transparency, and enhancing public participation in legislative processes.
Elias Castillo’s work also reflects a deep commitment to social justice. He has consistently championed the rights of marginalized communities, advocating for policies that promote equality and inclusivity. His efforts in this regard are not confined to rhetoric but are evident in the tangible legislative measures he supports and the initiatives Parlatino has undertaken under his guidance.
Elias Castillo stands out as a paragon of legislative excellence in Latin America. His extensive career, marked by significant accomplishments both in Panama and on the regional stage, highlights the vital role of dedicated and visionary leadership in shaping the future of the region. As Executive Secretary of the Latin American Parliament, Castillo continues to lead with integrity, fostering a spirit of cooperation and championing the causes of democracy and development.
In the ever-evolving political landscape of Latin America, Elias Castillo remains a steadfast figure, piecing together the diverse and intricate mosaic of regional governance with unyielding dedication and unparalleled expertise.
Religious liberty holds a role, in communities granting individuals the freedom to practice their faith without state intervention. This fundamental right influences the formulation of policies by authorities influencing aspects such as human rights regulations and immigration guidelines. Exploring the connection between freedom and policymaking sheds light, on the importance placed on this principle in Europe.
Exploring the impact of freedom, on the development of human rights regulations, in Europe.
Religious liberty has long been a tenet of human rights initiatives, in Europe. It empowers individuals to embrace their beliefs openly and without apprehension fostering a climate where faith can be practiced without hindrance. This fundamental freedom extends beyond worship to encompass the expression of ones convictions. European nations dedicate efforts to upholding this right enacting regulations and statutes to safeguard the ability of all individuals to adhere to their chosen faith. An appreciation for freedom underscores its role, in shaping policies related to human rights.
The Influence of Religious Freedom, on Human Rights Legislation, in Europe.
The influence of freedom, on human rights laws is deep and complex. By upholding diversity in beliefs and the freedom to practice religion Europe bolsters its dedication to safeguarding rights and combating discrimination. This connection between freedom and human rights legislation establishes a foundation for preserving individual liberties and fostering societal unity. Consequently legal frameworks in Europe are constantly developing to enhance the protection of expression the right to hold beliefs and equality, within various religious groups.
Ensuring Religious Freedom, in European Countries; Tactics, to Safeguard Rights
To safeguard freedom, in countries it is crucial to adopt various approaches. Governments need to establish measures for minority groups and uphold regulations that prevent discrimination on religious grounds. Encouraging dialogue and involvement, among faith communities can foster empathy and acceptance. It is also important to ensure that governmental policies adhere to human rights norms to preserve freedoms effectively. By tackling these core challenges European nations can cultivate a climate where diverse religious views are valued and upheld.
Best Practices for Protecting Religious Freedom in Europe
To uphold freedom, in Europe it is essential to have laws in place encourage conversations between different faiths and protect religious sites. Nations should enforce laws against discrimination. Educate people on the value of respecting all religions. By following these steps European countries can show their dedication to rights and unity among communities creating a welcoming atmosphere, for all belief systems.
Steps to Enact Laws Protecting Religious Freedom, in European Nations.
The process of legislating religious freedom in European countries involves multiple steps, including the creation of legal frameworks that ensure diverse worship practices are protected. To learn more about how these policies intersect with broader European immigration rules, explore the detailed information available on the Common European Asylum System. Crafting these laws often requires balancing various interests to protect human rights and maintain social cohesion while fostering an environment of tolerance and mutual respect.
Influence of religious freedom on European immigration and integration laws
Religious freedom plays a key role in shaping immigration and integration laws in Europe. These laws guide how people from different countries settle and live within European nations. Ensuring religious freedom helps immigrants feel welcomed and respected. It also allows them to maintain their cultural and religious practices. By understanding these impacts, we can see the importance of religious freedom in creating fair and inclusive societies.
How religious diversity in Europe impacts integration policies
Religious diversity in Europe prompts the creation of nuanced integration policies designed to foster social cohesion and mutual respect among various faith communities. Policies on multiculturalism, including those addressing the integration of Muslim immigrants and the accommodation of religious practices in public institutions, are increasingly important in this diverse landscape. By ensuring that integration strategies are inclusive and respectful of different belief systems, European nations aim to balance the need for social unity with the protection of religious freedom. This approach reinforces the values of tolerance and inclusivity crucial to Europe’s democratic identity.
Role of religious freedom in shaping European immigration laws
Religious freedom plays a crucial role in shaping European immigration laws, as it ensures that asylum policies are inclusive and non-discriminatory. By upholding the right to religious expression, European countries aim to protect refugees fleeing religious persecution, thus influencing humanitarian immigration rules. This commitment to religious freedom within immigration policies fosters diverse, multicultural societies and reflects Europe’s broader dedication to human rights and equality.
Challenges of balancing religious freedom and national integration
Balancing religious freedom and national integration poses significant challenges for European policymakers. Issues like religious accommodation in public institutions, cultural assimilation policies, and the tension between secularism and religious expression require careful consideration. Countries struggle to develop inclusive policies that respect diverse beliefs while fostering social cohesion and national identity. These complexities make the balancing act between safeguarding religious freedoms and ensuring effective national integration an ongoing and evolving task.
Successful examples of European immigration policies promoting religious tolerance
European immigration policies promoting religious tolerance have seen success in several countries. For example, Sweden’s inclusive approach ensures that immigrants can practice their faith freely. This model has reduced social tensions and promoted cultural integration. Such policies underline the importance of safeguarding religious rights in diverse societies. For further insights on how religious restrictions vary worldwide, visit the Pew Research Center’s detailed report. Implementing these policies also showcases Europe’s commitment to human rights and equality, strengthening the social fabric.
Common Queries Regarding How Religious Freedom Influences the Development of Human Rights Policies, in Europe
How does the concept of freedom impact the formulation of human rights policies, in Europe?
Religious freedom is an aspect of human rights policies, in Europe with many European nations incorporating it into their constitutions. By safeguarding principles like freedom of speech and assembly these countries foster communities where various religious viewpoints can peacefully exist alongside each other. This practice influences the development of fair treatment policies and safeguards, against discrimination.
Is there any legislation, in Europe that focuses on protecting the freedom of religion and belief?
Indeed there are laws, in Europe that directly deal with the freedom to practice ones religion. For instance Article 9 of the European Convention, on Human Rights ensures individuals rights to have their thoughts, beliefs and religious practices. Furthermore Article 10 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union protects freedom well. These legal structures guarantee people the ability to worship as they choose while also considering rights and societal concerns.
How do European authorities navigate the balance, between upholding freedoms and safeguarding other fundamental human rights?
European governments aim to strike a balance, between upholding freedom and safeguarding other human rights through the enactment of legislation that safeguards individual freedoms while also preserving public peace and security. For instance regulations prohibiting hate speech and discrimination are designed to shield individuals from harm without impeding practices. Courts frequently serve a function in deciphering these laws to maintain an equilibrium, between conflicting rights and liberties.
How do European immigration policies get affected by freedom?
The influence of freedom, on immigration rules in Europe is substantial as it influences the standards for granting asylum and refugee status. Several European nations view persecution as a reason for providing asylum. Additionally regulations are adjusted to support immigrants from beliefs allowing them to freely practice their faith, which is vital for their effective assimilation, into society.
How does the concept of freedom impact the assimilation of immigrants, in Europe?
The freedom to practice ones religion is important for immigrants to feel welcomed and respected allowing them to hold onto their religious heritage. Providing access, to places of worship and schools helps immigrants feel included and appreciated, which is vital for their integration into society fostering unity and cooperation, among communities.
Are there any laws, in countries that focus on regulating the religious customs of immigrants?
Indeed numerous European nations have regulations and guidelines, in place to cater to the customs of migrants. These regulations may encompass allowances for observing holidays adhering to restrictions in public establishments like schools and hospitals and upholding the freedom to dress in religious attire. The objective of these regulations is to honor and support the traditions of migrants facilitating their assimilation, into society while safeguarding their religious heritage.
Exploring the Impact of Religious Freedom, on the Development of European Governance.
The concept of freedom plays a role, in shaping the laws and regulations across Europe. It ensures that people can freely follow their faith without any intervention from the authorities impacting aspects such, as human rights laws and immigration policies. By promoting tolerance and embracing diversity religious freedom contributes to building communities that honor perspectives and traditions.
This overview emphasizes the influence of freedom, on European policy. Recognizing this significance allows us to grasp the principles that form the foundation of governance in Europe. If you wish to explore this topic or actively support freedom explore our detailed reports and tools designed to assist you in making informed choices and instigating impactful transformations.
Panama City, Panama – In a world where religious freedoms are increasingly under threat, the Faith and Freedom Summit IV is set to provide a crucial platform for dialogue and action. Scheduled for September 24-25, 2024, co-organized together with the Latin American Parliament in Panama City, this summit promises to be a pivotal event for scholars, human rights advocates, religious leaders, and politicians committed to defending freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) globally.
Global Leaders to Convene in Panama for Faith and Freedom Summit IV 13
The Faith and Freedom Summit IV aims to bring together high-level thought-leaders to highlight the importance of FoRB and to develop actionable policies to promote greater respect for religious diversity. This year’s theme, “Practicing What We Preach,” underscores the summit’s commitment to turning words into actions.
Distinguished Speakers and Interactive Sessions
The summit will feature an impressive lineup of speakers, including, but not only:
Mr. Elias Castillo, Executive Secretary of the Latin American Parliament
Mr. Ruben Farje, Representative to Panama of the Organization of American States
Dr. Nazila Ghanea, Special Rapporteur on FoRB at the United Nations
Mrs. Maricarmen Plata, Secretary for Access to Rights and Equity at the Organization of American States
Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher, Co-President of Religions for Peace
Mrs. Preeta Bansal, Global Council Chairperson of the United Religions Initiative
Renowned individuals in the field along with experts will lead conversations and interactive sessions to evaluate aspects that require enhancements in safeguarding religious freedom on a global scale. Participants will be able to gain insights from professionals and exchange personal anecdotes promoting a cooperative atmosphere, with the goal of influencing forthcoming regulations.
Global Leaders to Convene in Panama for Faith and Freedom Summit IV 14
Networking and Collaboration
One of the goals of the summit is to provide a platform, for sharing successful strategies and cultivating long term connections. Attendees will have plenty of chances to engage with individuals and groups strengthening their capacity to advance their respective endeavors and undertakings.
Event Details
Dates: September 24-25, 2024
Location: Latin American Parliament, Panama City, Panama
For those traveling from afar, the Radisson Panama Canal is the closest hotel to the Latin American Parliament facilities. Early booking is recommended to ensure convenient access to the event.
The Faith and Freedom Summit IV goes beyond being a conference; it serves as a rallying cry. Regardless of whether you’re an academic a champion of rights a spiritual guide or a public servant your involvement is crucial in the battle against religious bias. This gathering provides a chance to join forces with a worldwide initiative committed to turning freedom of religion and belief into a tangible possibility, for all individuals.
Together, let’s practice what we preach and make freedom of religion or belief a reality for everyone, leaving no one behind.
Global Leaders to Convene in Panama for Faith and Freedom Summit IV 15
List of speakers in alphabetical order, and growing:
Jonathan Ammons, International Public Affairs Director for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Amy Andrus, Associate Director at the International Center for Law and Religion Studies, BYU
Ivan Arjona-Pelado, President of UN ECOSOC consultative status foundation MEJORA and president of the European Office of the Church of Scientology for Public Affairs and Human Rights
Preeta Bansal, Global Council Chairperson of the United Religions Initiative
Cristian Badillo, General Director of Fundación Conciencia Nacional
Francisco Blanco, Rector of Santa María La Antigua Catholic University in Panama
Maritza Cedeño, President of the National Bar Association of Panama
Alfonso Celotto, Constitutional Lawyer at the University of Roma Tre
Manuel Corral, Private Secretary to Mexican Catholic Cardinal Carlos Aguiar for Institutional Relations
Carmen Dominguez, President of the Latin America Consortium of Religious Freedom
Willy Fautre, Founder and Director of Human Rights Without Frontiers
Jan Figel, Founder of the European Institute of Innovation & Technology
Thomas Schirrmacher, Co-President of Religions for Peace
Felipe Gomez, Coordinator of COMPAS Central America
Nazila Ghanea, Special Rapporteur on FoRB at the United Nations
Yosef Garmon, President of the Humanitarian Coalition of Israel
Gustavo Guillerme, President of the World Congress of Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue
Giselle Lima, Co-Chair of the Panama International Religious Freedom Roundtable
Pedro Mena, Head of Religious Affairs for the State of Mexico
Olivia McDuff, Public Affairs Officer at the Church of Scientology International
Gregory Mitchell, Founder and Chair of the IRF Secretariat
Dennis Petri, International Director of the International Institute for Religious Freedom
Maricarmen Plata, Secretary for Access to Rights and Equity at the Organization of American States
Fernando Roig, Director of the Joint Master Red Global Consortium (Erasmus Mundus International)
Eric Roux, Co-chair of the FoRB Roundtable Brussels-EU
Francisco Sanchez, Secretary of Worship for the Republic of Argentina
Scott Stearman, Vice Chair of the Parliament of World Religions
David Trimble, Interim President of the Religious Freedom Institute
Andrea De Vita, Director of the Religious Freedom, Beliefs, and Worship Chair at Universidad del Salvador
Brooke Zaugg, Vice President of the Faith & Media Initiative
Global Leaders to Convene in Panama for Faith and Freedom Summit IV 16
The Office of the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS) has received a report from the Department of Electoral Cooperation and Observation regarding the presidential electoral process in Venezuela in 2024. The report highlights the worst form of repression, where the people are prevented from finding solutions through elections.
The Venezuelan regime has been accused of applying its repressive scheme to distort the electoral result, making it available to manipulation. The Maduro regime has mocked important actors of the international community, going into an electoral process without guarantees or mechanisms to enforce those guarantees.
The report notes that the complete manual for fraudulent handling of the electoral result was applied in Venezuela on the night of the election, in many cases in a very rudimentary manner. There has been talk of an audit or a recount of the minutes of electoral material, but this has not had the slightest conditions of security and control.
The opposition campaign headquarters has presented the minutes by which it would have won the election, but Maduro, including the CNE, has not yet been able to present the minutes by which it would have won. The Secretary General of the OAS, Luis Almagro, has expressed regret over the lack of cumulative memory of actors in the international community, which systematically leads to repeating errors.
The burden of injustice on the people of Venezuela continues, with Venezuelans once again victims of repression. The Secretary General has stated that “no revolution” can leave people with fewer rights than they had, poorer in values and principles, more unequal in the instances of justice and representation, more discriminated against depending on where their thinking or political direction lies.
According to a report released by the Organization of American States (OAS) the Department of Electoral Cooperation and Observation (DECO) stated that the outcome of the Venezuelan presidential elections conducted on July 28 2024 is not acceptable. The report, directed to OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro, details irregularities and structural problems that affected the voting process casting doubt on the credibility of the elections.
The National Electoral Council (CNE) declared Nicolás Maduro as the winner of the election stating that he secured 51.2% of the votes while his main rival, Edmundo González received 44.2%. However according to the OAS report there are differences between these official figures and independent evaluations such as exit polls and citizen led verifications that showed a clear advantage for González.
The CNEs announcement was made than six hours after the polling stations closed without providing a detailed breakdown of the results or granting access, to official tally sheets. The report criticized the CNE for labeling the results as “irreversible” despite mathematical errors and a lack of transparency.
Systematic Intimidation and Repression
The recent report from the Organization of American States (OAS) reveals a scheme orchestrated by the Maduro government to disrupt the electoral process by using tactics like fearmongering, political oppression and disqualifying opposition contenders. Of concern is the case of María Corina Machado, a prominent opposition leader who was barred from participating despite winning in the primary elections, a move widely perceived as politically motivated.
Leading up to the elections there were than 135 arbitrary arrests documented in the report, with many of them targeting individuals affiliated with the opposition. The air was thick with apprehension marked by instances of violence enforced disappearances and harassment directed at supporters of opposing parties. On election day itself there were reports of intimidation incidents occurring, such as sightings of government factions, near polling places.
Lack of Transparency and Observational Access
The OAS report underscores the importance of transparency in elections pointing out that the CNE hindered both international observers from effectively monitoring the electoral procedures. While a few civil society organizations were granted observer status by the CNE access was denied to electoral observation missions such as the European Union and the Carter Center.
Moreover the report highlights that the CNE refused entry to opposition witnesses at polling stations contributing to a decline in trust in the election process. Despite these obstacles local observers noted that opposition witnesses were present, in 90% of polling stations.
Electoral Manipulation and Clientelism
The report details how the Maduro administration used government resources to gain an edge in elections, such as offering aid in return for political backing. This tactic along with the absence of rules on campaign funding resulted in an unfair advantage for the ruling party.
Furthermore the OAS report raised concerns about the lack of autonomy within the CNE highlighting that its members have ties, to the Maduro government. This situation undermined the credibility of the electoral commission. Cast doubts on its capacity to oversee impartial and transparent elections.
Call for Accountability
Based on the evidence of irregularities the OAS has determined that the official outcomes of the Venezuelan presidential elections lack credibility and should not be recognized as reflective of democratic principles. The report emphasizes the need for transparency in disclosing voting records and urges global accountability measures against the actions of the Maduro government.
Amid protests in Venezuela following the election outcome the OAS findings underscore the ongoing struggle for democracy, within the nation. The Venezuelan populace, who displayed a dedication to exercising their democratic freedoms now confront an uncertain future as governmental authority grows stronger and dissent is suppressed.
Serbia plans to take one of the leading places in the supply of lithium to the markets of European countries. The country’s president, Aleksandar Vucic, noted the possibility of producing about 58,000 tons of lithium per year in local enterprises.
If all this metal were sent to the European Union (EU), it could be used to make batteries for 1.1 million electric vehicles. Thus, Serbia will be able to capture about 17% of the lithium market in the EU during the energy transition.
The Serbian leader noted that Belgrade is conducting negotiations on this matter with a number of European companies, including Mercedes, Volkswagen and Stellantis.
At the same time, Vucic considers it necessary to use most of this metal for the production of batteries and catalysts in the country.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz attended on July 19a “critical raw materials summit” in the Serbian capital where a memorandum of understanding between the EU and Serbia’s government on a “strategic partnership” on sustainable raw materials, battery supply chains and electric vehicles was signed Germany is also interested in the use of this material in the production of equipment.
The decision to stop lithium development jointly with the Australian-British company Rio Tinto was made in 2022.
This was preceded by environmental protests, whose participants opposed the mining of the lithium-bearing mineral jadarite in the area of the city of Loznica. But a Serbian court overturned this decision recently.
Illustrative photo by Pixabay: https://www.pexels.com/photo/round-brown-and-grey-metal-heavy-equipment-on-sand-33192/
Acts of the Apostles, chapter 4. 1 – 4. The capture of Peter and John and consequences of Peter’s speech. 5 – 12. The questioning of the apostles before the Sanhedrin and their answer. 13 – 22. The bewilderment of the Sanhedrin and the release of the apostles. 23 – 31. The prayer of the apostles and the new miraculous sign. 32 – 37. The internal state of the early Church.
Acts. 4:1. While they were speaking to the people, the priests, the governor of the temple, and the Sadducees stood before them,
“While they spake,” therefore the speech of the apostles was “interrupted” by the priests.
“the priests, the governor of the temple, appeared before them”, οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ ὁ στρατηγὸς τοῦ ἱεροῦ. The definite articles of the Greek original here point to certain priests who had a turn in the temple services during that week (cf. Luke 1:8). The priests intervened here out of irritation that the apostles, without being legally authorized according to them, were teaching the people in the temple.
“the governor of the temple”, actually the head of the guard, which consists of Levites and takes care of good order, silence and order in the temple, especially during worship. He was also a priest.
Acts. 4:2. who were angry because they taught the people and preached in the name of Jesus resurrection from the dead;
the “Sadducees” took part in the capture of the apostles, as they were angered by their teaching of the resurrection of the dead, which, as is known, they did not recognize.
Acts. 4:3. and they laid hands on them and detained them until the morning; because it was already evening.
Although as a “first” measure against the apostles’ violation of temple order it was quite enough to simply remove them from the temple or forbid them to speak, in reality we see much more than that. The priests and others who came with them “laid hands” on the apostles and “detained them until the morning.” This suggests that the activity and personality of the apostles had already attracted the alarming attention of the authorities, and that the latest event in the temple was only a sufficient occasion to bring them before the highest court.
“it was evening”. The apostles went to pray in the temple at the ninth hour (that is, at 3 o’clock in the afternoon). Between the healing of the chromia and Peter’s speech to the people, it could have been a long time before the miracle was publicized and the people flocked. Peter’s speech itself, which may have been only briefly summarized by the scribe, may have been longer. From this it is clear that the capture of the apostles took place at such a time in the evening, when it would have been difficult to assemble the Sanhedrin, and there was no need for such haste: it was enough to do what had already been done – to keep them under guard until morning .
Acts. 4:4. And many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of men came to five thousand.
“the number of men came to five thousand” (τῶν ἀνδρῶν), besides, apparently, women and children. The number of converts this time surpassed even the first success on the day of Pentecost, evidently because, besides the power of the apostle’s word and the greatness of the miracle, the people themselves were already more disposed to believe in Christ by the conduct of the believers, who excited the popular sympathies, as and from the extraordinary actions of the apostles.
St. John Chrysostom explains these events thus: “About five thousand believed.” .. What does this mean? Did they see the apostles in glory? Did they not see, on the contrary, that they were bound? How did they believe then? Do you see the manifest power of God? For those who believed should have become weaker because of what happened, but they did not. Peter’s speech sowed deep seeds and touched their souls.”
Acts. 4:5. On the next day their leaders, elders and scribes gathered together in Jerusalem,
From the enumeration of those gathered in Jerusalem, it is clear that this was the full meeting of the Sanhedrin – in the same composition as at the trial of Jesus Christ.
Acts. 4:6. high priest Annas and Caiaphas, John and Alexander, and as many as were of the high priestly lineage;
“John, Alexander, and the rest” – members of the high priestly family, unknown to history, who apparently had great power in the Sanhedrin at the time.
Acts. 4:7. and, standing them in the midst, they asked them: By what power, or in whose name did you do this?
The members of the Sanhedrin hardly knew “in whose name” and “by what power” the apostles performed the miracle that brought them to the highest court. If they do ask such a question, it is either to justify their accusation of blasphemy through the thinking of the Apostles themselves, or – according to the interpretation of St. John Chrysostom – “they assumed that the Apostles, fearing the people, would deny themselves, and thought, that this will fix everything.”
Acts. 4:8. Then Peter, being filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: leaders of the people and elders of Israel!
“being filled with the Holy Spirit” – in a special way, for the protection of the righteous work, according to the promise of Christ (Matt. 10:19 – 20, etc.).
Acts. 4:9. if we are questioned today about a favor to an infirm person, how was he healed,
The conditional form of the apostles’ answer to the Sanhedrin’s question is above all a delicate but also clear indication of how unjust it is for the apostles to be judged for their help to the sick man.
St. John Chrysostom: “The apostles seem to say: ‘For this, of course, we should have been crowned and proclaimed benefactors, but instead we are condemned because of the beneficence to a man who is weak, not rich, not strong and not equal [to others].”
Acts. 4:10. let it be known to all of you and to the entire nation of Israel, that through the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, through him he stands before you healthy.
The apostle points out the undoubtedness of the miracle and the power with which it was performed. This is the power and the name of Jesus.
Acts. 4:11 a.m. This is the stone which, neglected by you masons, has become the head of the corner; and in no one else is there salvation;
Acts. 4:12. for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.
To explain the meaning and power of Jesus’ name, the apostle quotes a sentence from a psalm, which the Lord himself once referred to Himself before the Jewish leaders (Ps. 117:22; see Matt. 21:42).
According to the meaning of this sentence, the Messiah is the chief cornerstone that the builders of the building neglected. The Crucified Christ is precisely this Stone which they, the builders, the leaders of the religious and moral life of the people, neglected in arranging the theocratic life of the people, but – in spite of everything – this Stone, by the will of God, nevertheless became the head and foundation of the new building of God’s kingdom on earth.
Boldly applying this meaning to the contemporary leaders of the people, who crucified Jesus, the apostle ends his speech with the majestic confession of Jesus as the true Messiah, whose name – and only this name – contains in its power the salvation of the whole world – not only the temporary one (such as the healing of the sick), but – what is more important – the eternal and universal (salvation from sins with all their consequences, including from death itself).
Acts. 4:13. And when they saw the courage of Petra and Joanna and when they realized that they were uneducated and simple people, they wondered; and they knew very well that they were with Jesus;
the “courage of Peter and Joanna,” who went from the position of accused to that of valid accusers before the whole Sanhedrin, is all the more impressive in view of their ignorance and simplicity, and caused understandable surprise and consternation. “It is possible to be both illiterate and unsophisticated, as well as simple and illiterate, but here both coincided. That is why everyone was amazed when Peter and John spoke and made speeches” (Theophilus).
Acts. 4:14. but seeing the healed man standing with them, they had nothing to object.
The recognition of the apostles as constant companions of Jesus assures everyone that these people really continued the work of their Master, so hated by the whole Sanhedrin, who had just betrayed the Lord to death. Evidently this served to inevitably condemn the apostles to the same fate by the charge of religious or political offense. But the presence of the healed man himself restrained the Sanhedrin, who could say nothing despite the apostles’ explanation of the miracle.
How did the healed man come to the Sanhedrin? Probably at the behest of the authorities themselves, who hoped to force him to deny the miraculousness of the healing, as they once did when the Lord healed the man born blind (John 9). But then, as now, the Sanhedrin misjudged the matter and only increased its shame and injustice.
Acts. 4:15. And, commanding them to go out of the Sanhedrin, they consulted among themselves
Acts. 4:16 a.m. and they said: what should we do with these people? For it is known to all who dwell in Jerusalem that a marked miracle was wrought through them, and we cannot deny it;
Acts. 4:17. but, that this may not be further spread among the people, let us sternly threaten them to speak no more of this name to any man.
Acts. 4:18. And when they called them, they commanded them not to speak or teach in the name of Jesus.
The decision of the Sanhedrin in the case of the apostles is the decision of confused people. They themselves say that all who live in Jerusalem know about the apparent miracle of the apostles, and at the same time they command that it should not be made public among the people. The thought of the decision, however, seems to be directed rather to the character of the explanation of the miracle than to the miracle itself as a fact, the publication of which was too late and naive to forbid.
The Sanhedrin forbids speaking about the “name” of Jesus, with whose power the apostles explain the performance of the miracle. “What folly!” exclaims John Chrysostom on this occasion, “knowing that Christ had risen and having in this proof of His Divinity, they hoped with their intrigues to hide the glory of Him whom death does not hold back. What can be compared with this folly? And do not be surprised that they again devise an impossible deed. Such is the property of malice: it looks at nothing, but wanders everywhere…”.
“never speak”. Not to speak even in private and not to teach in public.
Acts. 4:19. But Peter and John answered them and said: judge whether it is fair before God that we listen to you more than to God;
“is it just before God.” The apostles do their work according to God’s command, of which miracles are an obvious and sufficient sign. This commandment is all the more binding and authoritative for them, because it commands them to preach, not some distant, abstract, and unverified truth, but what they themselves have seen and heard. To give up the right to talk about these things is “impossible” as it would be tantamount to rendering a reasonable person speechless.
Thus it is also shown that the order of the Sanhedrin itself went beyond common sense and the laws of conscience, and as such justly deserved the same fate to which it now ventures to condemn the Divine commands.
Acts. 4:20. for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.
Acts. 4:21. And they, having threatened them, let them go, because because of the people they could not find how to punish them; for all glorified God for what had happened.
“they did not find how to punish them” (πῶς κολάσονται αὐτούς, διὰ τὸν λαόν). More precisely, Slavic: “nichoche obretshe, kako muchit ih”, that is, they did not find how, on what grounds, to punish them.
“because of the people” (cf. Matt. 21 et seq.) – because of fear of the people, because of the mass sympathy and favor towards the apostles.
Acts. 4:22. And the man with whom this miracle of healing happened was more than forty years old.
Deyan. 4:23. When they were released, they came to their own and told what the high priests and elders had told them.
“came to their own.” At this time their brethren were gathered together (verse 31), probably praying for the release of the apostles and for the successful completion of their work.
Acts. 4:24. And they, having listened to them, with one accord raised their voice to God and said: Lord, You are God, who created the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them;
“unanimously… they said.” It is likely that one of those present, perhaps Peter, was an exponent of the prayerful sentiments of the believers, who, repeating within themselves the words of his prayer, thus turned it into a unanimous prayer of the whole community (cf. Acts 1:24).
The prayer is based on a sentence from David’s second psalm (Ps. 2:1-2), which describes with evangelical clarity the rebellion of the kings and princes of the nations against the Messiah and the One who sent Him, which takes place during the trial and crucifixion of Jesus. As the apostles carried on the work of the Messiah, the present rebellion against them was also the same as that “against the Lord and His Christ,” and therefore gave rise to prayer for their protection and strengthening.
“They refer to the prophecy, as if asking God to fulfill his promise, and at the same time to console themselves that their enemies had devised all in vain. Their words mean, ‘Stop all this, and show that their designs were in vain.” (John Chrysostom, Theophylact).
Acts. 4:25. You are the One who, through the Holy Spirit, through the mouth of our father David, Your servant, said: “Why were the nations agitated, and the people planned vain things?
The attribution of the quoted psalm to David is not evident from the inscription of the psalm itself, but it was probably indicated here by the apostles on the authority of tradition.
Acts. 4:26 a.m. The kings of the earth rose up, and the princes gathered together against the Lord and against His Anointed”.
Acts. 4:27. Because Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel gathered in that city against Your Holy Son Jesus, whom You anointed,
“Whom You have anointed” – ὃν ἔχρισας. This followed at His baptism, at the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Him.
Acts. 4:28. that they may do that which Thy hand and Thy will had predestined to be done.
“to do this”. The enemies of Christ wanted to do quite another thing – to kill Jesus as the unacknowledged Messiah, but in reality, without knowing it, they did what the hand of God’s almighty had predestined to happen – to redeem all mankind through the death of the Messiah and restored it to its former dignity and glory (cf. John Chrysostom and Theophylact).
Acts. 4:29. And now, O Lord, look upon their threats, and grant Thy servants with full boldness to speak Thy word,
Acts. 4:30. as You stretch out Your hand for healing, and let miracles and omens happen in the name of Your Holy Son Jesus.
“stretching out Your healing hand” – ἐν τῷ τὴν χεῖρά σου ἐκτείνειν σε εἰς ἴασιν. In the Slavic translation: “once upon a time I extended Your hand to You in healing”. This is not a mere reference to the signs accompanying the work of the apostles, but to the necessity of the success of that work, which was also the object of their prayer. The meaning of the verses is: “Give … with boldness to speak Your word, as at that time You will help (help) them from Your side with wonderful healings and signs.”
Acts. 4:31. And after they had prayed, the place where they were gathered was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and boldly spoke the word of God.
“the place shook” – this was not a natural earthquake, but a miraculous earthquake (for only the “place of assembly” was shaken), which means that God heard their prayer, and at the same time foreshadows another miraculous event – the filling of believers with the emboldened power of the Holy Spirit.
It was also a symbol of God’s omnipotence, assuring the apostles that they need not fear the threats of the Sanhedrin and that He was strong enough to protect them by shaking the place of their prayer meeting (John Chrysostom, Theophilus). Thus, to encourage the gathered believers, the Lord immediately fulfilled their prayer and granted what they asked for: to speak with boldness and support their words with signs and wonders. And so they spoke, and the meeting place was “shaken.”
Acts. 4:32. And the many who believed had one heart and one soul; and no one called any of his property his own, but everything was common to them.
Acts. 4:33. The apostles testified with great power about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and great grace was upon them all.
The miracle of the healing of the lame and the great moral victory of the apostles over the Sanhedrin in its first rebellion against the new society is a great event in the early Christian church. Since then, the community of Christians has multiplied almost three times compared to the believers from the first day of Pentecost. This is why the author again finds it necessary to describe the inner state of this growing society (verses 32 – 37).
As the main characteristic of this society, he points out that the multitude had complete unanimity and brotherly love: “one heart and one soul” – perfect unity in thought, in feeling, in will, in faith, in the whole structure of spiritual life.
Truly, an amazing phenomenon in a sinful, self-absorbed world. Another characteristic feature, which naturally follows from the first, is the complete community of property, not by compulsion and by any law binding on all, but completely voluntarily, by virtue of the fraternal love and moral unity that animates all.
“no one called any of his property his own,” though there was property, but it was given brotherly to all who needed it, according to their needs, and thus general contentment was achieved and the complete absence of needy.
“great grace was upon them all.” It was the most characteristic and magnificent mutual aid society in the history of mankind, not devoid of a reasonable and elaborate organization, with a special general treasury, which, on the one hand, was constantly replenished by the proceeds of the property donated and sold for the common benefit, and on the other , continuously maintained a complete absence of the poor and needy. And at the head of this so wisely organized organization stood not great statesman minds, but ordinary Galilean fishermen, the apostles, or to be more precise – abundantly “the new power of truly Christian gracious inspiration pouring through them”, the power of faith and love for the Savior.
“they testified with great power about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ”. In explaining the great rapture of the believers, the author of Acts mentions the great power of the apostolic preaching “about the resurrection of the Lord.” This resurrection is the foundation of the whole Christian faith (1 Cor. 15:14), and therefore it is the foundation and center of the whole apostolic preaching, being, of course, not the exclusive, but only the main, the main theme of that preaching.
Acts. 4:34. There was not one among them who was in want; for those who owned lands or houses sold them and brought the price of what was sold
“who owned lands or houses” – ὅσοι γὰρ κτήτορες χωρίων ἢ οἰκιῶν ὑπῆρχον. The more accurate meaning of the expression is: not “all who”, but “those who”. Nor does “selling them” mean that the owners “sold everything,” leaving nothing for themselves. In both cases it is a question of good will and brotherly love on the part of everyone, and various degrees were allowed, in which there was not even a shadow of external coercion (cf. Acts 5:4).
Acts. 4:35. and laid at the feet of the apostles; and it was distributed to each one according to his need.
“laid at the feet of the apostles” – in the sense of their complete disposition and responsibility.
Acts. 4:36. Thus, Josiah, called by the apostles Barnabas, which means son of consolation, a Levite, a native of Cyprus,
As an example of the sacrifices mentioned, perhaps the most instructive of all, the author points to Josiah, who was called by the apostles Barnabas, which means “son of comfort.” This Barnabas—afterwards so famous a companion of the apostle Paul—was a prophet (Acts 13:1), and his sobriquet probably indicated the special consolation of his inspired prophetic utterances (1 Cor. 14:3). He was also a “Levite.” (1 Cor. 14:3) This, too, is remarkable: never before has there been an instance of a holy knee bowing before Christ by faith in Him. However, soon there are mentions of many priests who submitted to Christ’s faith (Acts 6:7).
“native of Cyprus” – from the island of Cyprus, located off the coast of Palestine in the Mediterranean Sea.
Acts. 4:37. who had a field, sold it, brought the money, and laid it at the feet of the apostles.
Priests and Levites could have real estate, as can be seen from the example of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 32 ff.).
Source in Russian: Explanatory Bible, or Commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments: In 7 volumes / Ed. prof. A.P. Lopukhin. – Ed. 4th. – Moscow: Dar, 2009, 1232 pp.
