|
The Serbian Orthodox Church, SPC, is yet to decide whether to launch its own internal investigation into paedophile sex claims. | Photo by Beta |
Police in the southern town of Vranje are questioning potential
witnesses about alleged sexual abuse committed by the local Serbian
Orthodox Bishop, Pahomije.
“We are investigating the case on the order of the prosecutor's
office. We will question the Bishop as well and the prosecutor will
decide whether to submit charges,” a source from Vranje police told
BIRN.
The Serbian Orthodox Church, SPC, is yet to decide whether to launch
its own internal investigation into paedophile sex claims against the
bishop.
“We still don't have the answers whether the SPC will start an
investigation or discuss the case at the Holy Synod in May,” the SPC
press office told BIRN.
Repeated claims of paedophilia against Bishop Pahomije and the
absence a reaction to them from the Church threaten the reputation of
the Church in society, experts say, predicting that the Pahomije case
will feature at the bishops' assembly on May 15.
“Unfortunately, in recent years, the Church had tendency to cover up
things that might compromise them in some form. The charges against
Bishop Pahomije were no exception,” Nikola Knezevic, from the Centre for
Studies of Religion, Politics and Society, said.
“It would be better for the Church to respond faster and more
efficiently in cases such as this, because otherwise it will damage the
Church's reputation in society,” he added.
On March 21, Vranjske newspaper published the testimony of
24-year-old Nemanja S, a SPC Vranje diocese warehouseman, who stated
that Pahomije had sexually abused him since he was 16 years old.
Lacking confidence in the Vranje police, the man reported the case to the Belgrade police on February 20.
Bishop Pahomije, who has denied the claims, stated that he was ready
to respond to any call from the police or prosecution regarding the
case. “It is my duty, and I will not escape from it,” he told the
newspaper Danas on March 25.
After the story hit the headlines, Vranje diocese responded with a
counter-claim on March 25, filing charges against the warehouseman for
embezzlement and abuse of office.
The diocese stated that the investigation into embezzlement was
launched in January and that the claims on sexual abuse were brought to
discredit the investigation.
On the other hand, Nemanja S. says that the charge of embezzlement
was filed just now because he decided to talk about paedophilia.
“It's easy to establish whether I have been taking goods from the
warehouse and selling them, as it can be checked within ten days,” he
told the local newspaper Vranjske on March 28.
“I believe the criminal charge of embezzlement came with such a delay
as a sort of vendetta for what I have told the police,” he added.
Bishop Pahomije faced trial for paedophilia in 2003 and was
acquitted. Since the first charges were brought against him, the Church
has made no comment on the issue.
The Church has its own legal system and penal system based on a canon
law. Following accusations against its members, it can lead an internal
investigation and order sanctions parallel to any proceedings conducted
in front of the state courts.
However, Mirko Djordjevic, a sociologist of religion, says that in
the past the Church preferred not to assume this role and left the state
courts to deal with such matters.
“The Church remains silent, which is a huge mistake, as it is not too
late for it to take a lead and resolve the issue,” he said.
“Some mention that Pahomije might be retired, which is not the worst
solution, but without an investigation that leads to the truth, it does
not solve the problem,” Djordjevic added, noting that the case must be
discussed at the May assembly of bishops.
“I expect the assembly to deliver precise decisions on launching an
investigation and possible sanctions. If they fail to do that, it will
be both bad for the Church, as it will be a sign that it is not ready to
deal with such a huge issue, and for Pahomije, who will remain under
the shadow of doubt,” Djordjevic continued.
Nikola Knezevic also says the Church should respond to the latest
claims of paedophilia, and show responsibility “not only for its
evangelical calling, for its believers, but also for the truth.
“Finally, it is in the interests of the Church to respond clearly and
unambiguously. The lack of reaction damages not only Church's
reputation, but also reduces its chance to point to the possible
groundless accusations.
“I am convinced that the SPC has the strength and ability to cope
with all the problems that impair its position in society. They have
enough smart and talented people to make such moves. I hope that in the
future the SPC will be more efficient and respond to problems within its
ranks,” he added.
Repeated claims on paedophilia
|
Bishop Pahomije. | Photo by Beta |
The saga dates back to October 2002, when a 13-year-old boy entered
the police station in Vranje, accompanied by his mother and grandmother,
to complain that he had been subjected to sexual abuse by Bishop
Pahomije.
After a four-month police investigation, Pahomije was eventually charged with sex offences relating to four underage boys.
Subsequent court proceedings lasted almost five years before all charges against the bishop were dropped on March 6, 2007.
The municipal court judgment was confirmed in a second-instance court in Nis – the equivalent of an appeal court.
Two charges were declared inadmissible because the court proceedings
had dragged on for so long and the time limit within which a court
decision must be reached had expired.
The other two charges were dismissed because the court found the boys’ testimony unreliable.
Under the principle of In dubio pro reo, a judge with any
doubts about whether the accused has committed an offence must rule in
favour of the accused. Bishop Pahomije was duly set free.
But the Supreme Court ruled in October 2007 that the two verdicts
clearing the bishop were unlawful, saying that the case had been delayed
until the charges expired, and there were no grounds to dismiss the
boys' testimonies as unreliable.
However, the court was unable to order a retrial because of double-jeopardy laws.
Many believed that the two judges presiding over Bishop Pahomije’s
first and second-instance trials did not act independently, but caved in
to pressure from the then Democratic Party of Serbia-led government of
Vojislav Kostunica, which had close ties to the Church.
Slobodan Homen, former state secretary in the ministry of justice,
stated in 2011 that Kostunica's government “covered up” the case against
Pahomije.
The ministry also decided to pay compensation to the four boys in
October 2011, despite the fact that the Bishop had been set free.
While during all that time the Serbian Orthodox Church remained
silent, in 2008 one bishop, Grigorije of Trebinje, in Bosnia, wrote to
the Church's metropolitans stating that the Church had to take a more
active role and should have found out the truth of the Pahomije case in
order to protect him from false claims, or sanction him had he been
found guilty.
In 2010, BIRN revealed that the Church had in fact formed a special commission in 2003 to investigate the charges.
However, the existence of the commission and its findings has remained a closely-guarded secret.
That the commission was led by then Bishop Irinej, now Patriarch of
the Serbian Orthodox Church, has also been kept from the public.