Vorsitzender Richter Yves Régimont …
Aus meiner Sicht präsentierte sich der erste Tag, wie eben die ersten Tage in einem Prozess gegen Scientology aussehen. Da wäre einmal der Staatsanwalt Cristophe Caliman zu erwähnen, dessen Ansage „Betrug“ und „Bildung einer kriminellen Vereinigung“ lautete. Das mögliche Verbot in Belgien ließ wiederum die Alarmglocken bei Scientology schrillen und man rückte mit einer großen Zahl an Anwälten an. Dann war da der vorsitzende Richter eines Dreiersenats, Yves Régimont, der vor allem durch gezielte Fragen auffiel und das Heft fest in der Hand hielt. Und dann war auch noch die erste Beschuldigte, die in den Zeugenstand gerufen wurde – Anne-France Hiernaux, die vor 2005 für die Finanzen bei Scientology in Belgien zuständig war.
Hiernaux erzählte zu Beginn ihrer Zeugenbefragung wie sie in Scientology kam, dass sie 2005 als Mitarbeiterin (Staff) aufgehört hatte. Régimont unternahm den einen oder anderen „Bohrversuch“, aber Hiernaux wollte nichts bemerkt bzw. sich gemerkt haben.
Dann versuchte der Richter, den Persönlichkeitstest (Oxford Capacity Analysis – OCA) mit seinen doch intimen 200 Fragen aufs Korn zu nehmen, worauf sich Hiernaux auf die Feststellung zurückzog, dass „man diese beantworten könnte oder auch nicht“. Sie merkte an, dass sie „nicht mehr hier wäre, wenn sie Scientology nicht gefunden hätte“. Sie sei 2005 aus Gesundheitsgründen als Mitarbeiterin ausgeschieden, aber immer noch ein bedingungsloser Fan der Psychosekte.
Régimont richtete sein Augenmerk dann wieder auf die Zeit, wo Hiernaux als Finanzverwalterin (Treasury Secretary) tätig war. Hiernaux berichtete von durchschnittlich 5.000 Euros Einnahmen pro Woche, dass es zwei Einnahmenquellen gab (Geld für „Services“ und Buchverkauf) und dass 30 Prozent wieder als Provisionen ausgeschüttet wurden. Entweder hat sich Jonny Jacobsen verhört, aber die Zahl von 30 Prozent ist mir unbekannt. Man kann maximal 15% lukrieren.
Bei der Frage, ob Scientology versucht hatte, diese Provisionen wieder zu erlangen, indem sie die Empfänger unter Druck gesetzt hat, war Hiernaux nicht erinnerlich. Sie sprach dann detailliert über die internen Geldflüsse – wie es eben Buchhalter können. Régimont war aber mehr an den vorgesetzten Stellen in Kopenhagen, Los Angeles interessiert – Hiernaux weniger und so gab es darüber nichts.
Dann wechselte man zum Persönlichen und darüber, wieviel sie selbst bezahlen musste. Hiernaux gab an, dass dies 250 Euros waren, ihr Ehemann 9.900 Euros. Dann ging man kurz und ohne Ergebnis auf die International Association of Scientologists (IAS) ein, um sich dann dem Thema Potential Trouble Source (PTS) zuzuwenden.
Staatsanwalt Christophe Caliman trug aus einem scientologischen Bericht vor, in dem ein Scientologe beschrieben wurde, der zahlungsunfähig war, was er mit der Frage verknüpfte, was „mit jemanden geschah, der seine Schulden nicht bezahlen konnte?“. Hernoux konnte sich wieder an nichts erinnern und so sprang ein anderer Angeklagter, Istvan Juhasz, ein, der dies erklären sollte. Immerhin war Juhasz ein früherer Präsident von Scientology in Belgien.
Es ging zuerst um die bereits angesprochene Potential Trouble Source, also um jemanden, der in den Augen von Scientology Schwierigkeiten verursachte und in Kontakt mit einer „Suppressive Person“ stand, die diese bewirkte. Richter Régimont wollte dann konkret wissen, ob ein einzelner Scientology sich dabei zwischen Scientology und seiner Familie entscheiden müsse. Juhasz verneinte.
Yves Régimont: „Die PTS-Person muss also diesbezüglich einen Kurs machen?“
Istvan Juhasz: „Nein. Als ersten Schritt versucht die Person mit der Hilfe eines ‚Ethik-Offiziers‘ die Situation zu lösen.“
Régimont: „Das ist mir zu kompliziert. Ich verfüge über keinen Scientology-Dolmetsch.“
Um dann die Frage anders zu stellen …
Régimont: „Nehmen wir an, dass ein Ehemann aufgebracht darüber ist, was ein Scientology-Kurs aus seiner Ehefrau macht. Die Frau ist damit in den Augen von Scientology PTS. Was machen Sie? Muss man sich vom Ehemann trennen?“
Juhasz: „Sie wird versuchen, die Einstellung ihres Ehemanns zu verändern.“
Régimont: „Sehen Sie, ich mache Fortschritte.“
Juhasz weiter: „Sie möchte Scientology weiter machen, er möchte Scientology verlassen.“
Régimont: „Also muss sie sich zwischen ihrer Familie und Scientology entscheiden. Ist das eine Wahl, der sie sich aus Eigenantrieb stellt oder etwas, dass sie z.B. von ihrem Scientology-Auditor vorgegeben bekommt?“
Juhasz: „Die Ehefrau entscheidet.“
Régimont: „Aber macht sie das nicht aufgrund der Vorgaben Hubbards [bzw. Scientology]?“
Juhasz: „Ja!“
Staatsanwalt Caliman wandte sich dann wieder an Hiernaux, sprach die „Zustandsformeln“ und dabei jene mit dem Namen Notlage an, bevor Richter Régimont den Gerichtsschreiber anwies, festzuhalten, dass Hiernaux generell unter Aufsicht bestimmter Personen agierte.
Danach strebte man zum Mittagessen …
Der Prozess ging an und für sich nachmittags weiter und ich weiß nicht, wann Jonny Jacobsen den entsprechenden Bericht nachreicht – bis dahin auf jeden Fall seinen Blog des gestrigen Vormittags: „Day one of the Belgian trial of Scientology focussed on the movement’s disciplinary code and how it makes its money.
The trial of two Scientology associations and 11 members opened in a packed Brussels courtroom Monday, 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 Hiernaux, was the first of the accused to take the stand.
Hiernaux, 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 the way they looked after their children. Her own family situation had not been good so he 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 Régimont, president of the three-strong tribunal judging the case, asked her about Scientology’s internal laws.
One thing that had struck him, he said, was that the movement’s 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 movement’s 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 haven’t had that experience,” Hiernaux 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 Régimont 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 Hiernaux. “You can say ‘I don’t agree and it stops there’.”
But so far as she was concerned, she added: “If I hadn’t found Scientology, I perhaps wouldn’t be here today.” What other people had found in the Catholic Church, she had found in Scientology, she said.
Scientology auditing, the movement’s 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 Régimont returned to her time as treasurer. Hiernaux 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.
Hiernaux 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 Régimont 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 Scientology’s 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. Hiernaux said she didn’t know anything about the international situation.
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.
Hiernaux 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, Istvan Juhasz, 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 Régimont. Someone who was PTS brought trouble not just to themselves but also to others, their family, their friends, Juhasz explained.
“Now we are getting to the core of it,” said Judge Régimont.”
“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. Juhasz 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 Juhasz. “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 Régimont remarked. “I don’t 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 Juhasz.
“You see? I’m making progress!” said the judge.
“She wants to continue in Scientology; he … wants her to leave the Church of Scientology,” Juhasz continued.
“So she needs to choose between her family and Scientology,” Judge Régimont 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 chose 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 Juhasz.
But that was part of Hubbard’s arsenal, said the judge. Yes, said Juhasz: but this was an extreme scenario. “I have never advised someone to leave their family. We try to do everything to resolve the situation.”
The prosecutor Caliman resumed his questioning of Hiernaux.
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, said Hiernaux, but that had no consequence.
Judge Régimont reminded her that she was accused of being a member of a criminal organisation. How did she feel about that?
Hiernaux 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 Hiernaux. “As an active member, my aim was to help people.”
And did she have a superior? Apart from Mr. Hubbard.
“We have an organigramme 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,” said Hiernaux. “But people supervised what was done.”
Judge Hiernaux 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.“
Fotos: Screenshots (2)