Prozess gegen Scientology in Belgien - Artikel 1 bis 35 von Jonny Jacobsen

8/18/2019 Prozess gegen Scientology in Belgien - Artikel 1 bis 35 von Jonny Jacobsen

1/157

Belgien vs. Scientology

Die gesammmelten Blogs

von Jonny Jacobsen


2/157

1. Scientology denounces Belgian fraud trial

Scientology has come out fighting days ahead of its trial inBelgium on charges of fraud and extortion, denouncing what itsays has been years of judicial harassmentScientology 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 religiousdiscrimination and vowed to fight it every step of the way.

Two Scientology organisations and at least 11 senior members go on trial in Brussels onMonday, 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 Churchdeny 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 judicialharassment.”

The trial, at Brussels' Palais de Justice , arises from two separate cases that were eventuallymerged. 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 possiblefraud and breach of trust after former members filed complaints against the movement.

Police raided Scientology offices in Brussels on September 30, 1999, as French officerscarried out a similar operation in Paris at the request of the Belgian authorities.

In 2007, prosecutors brought charges against several individuals and two Scientologyorganisations: the Church of Scientology in Belgium and its European Office for PublicAffairs and Human Rights. Both are registered as non-profit associations.

But the case got tied up in procedural wrangling at Belgium'sChambre de Conseil , whichdecides whether or not there is enough evidence to bring the case to court.


3/157

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 recruitmembers.

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 ofmedicine.

This last charge concerns Scientology's Purification Rundown, a cure it administers, whichsome medical professionals have criticised as potentially dangerous.

The programme, devised by Scientology's founder L. Ron Hubbard, combines aerobicexercise and long sessions in a sauna with the consumption of high doses of minerals andvitamins.

Trial is "incomprehensible and unacceptable": Scientology Over the years, Scientology's lawyers have filed a series of legal challenges to the way theinvestigation has been conducted.

In 2007, the Church of Scientology in Belgium argued in court that prosecutors' publicstatements on the affair had not respected the presumption of innocence, prejudicing anyfuture 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 theycould not say their trial had been prejudiced before the event. A court statementalso said thatScientology had relied too heavily on press reports of prosecutors' statements, adding: “...itwas highly possible that those articles did not accurately reflect the nuances of the remarks inquestion”.

Scientology tried to stop the prosecution on a variety of procedural grounds. But on December10, 2014, Belgium's top court, theCour de Cassation, rejected their arguments, clearing theway for a trial.

In a statement Friday, Scientology spokesman Eric Roux said it was “incomprehensible andunacceptable” that Belgium's Scientology community was being subjected to suchdiscriminatory 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 ofaccusations that proved to be false, their good faith is recognised as the lies told about themdisappear in the light of the truth.

“Scientologists in Belgium form a community of honest citizens, workers, contributing toBelgian society, and want to see their right to freedom of conscience and religion and non-discrimination respected,” he added.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press#%7B%22fulltext%22:[%22ECHR%20266%20%282013%29%22],%22itemid%22:[%22003-4500339-5427285%22]%7Dhttp://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press#%7B%22fulltext%22:[%22ECHR%20266%20%282013%29%22],%22itemid%22:[%22003-4500339-5427285%22]%7D


4/157

The trial is scheduled to run over 13 court dates up to November 27, before judges at the69th chambre du tribunal correctionnel de Bruxelles .

If either of the Scientology organisations is found guilty, it would be first time the movementhad been convicted in Belgium.

In 2009, a Paris court fined two Scientology organisations hundreds of thousands of euros fororganised fraud.

France's highest court confirmed the convictions in 2013 and in 2014 the European Court ofHuman 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 thefocus on the movement’s disciplinary code and how it makesits 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 itmade its money.

There was standing room only as the press came out in force to hear details of the chargesagainst 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 firstof the accused to take the stand.

Anne-France, now 47, explained how she became a Scientologist as a teenager after getting toknow members and being impressed how they applied their beliefs in the way they lookedafter their children. Her own family situation had not been good so she had left home early,she explained.


5/157

She had put aside her studies in biology and pharmacy to devote herself to working forScientology, She had always been part of a group, she said,“...and I realised that what theydid was quite good.”

Yves Régimont, president of the three-strong tribunal judging the case, asked her aboutScientology’s internal laws. One thing that had struck him, he said, was that the movement’s founder had devised acomplex 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 fewminutes late for a course, he said.

“Mr. Hubbard seems to have foreseen everything,” he said, referring to the movement’sfounder, who died in 1986. “You have a criminal code for things, with infractions andsanctions.”

He noted too that Scientologists were in the habit of denouncing each other for infractions.

“Personally, I haven’t had that experience,” the defendant replied. But it was a bit like whathappened 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 Anne -France. “You can say ‘I don’t agree and itstops there’.”

But so far as she was concerned, she added: “If I hadn’t found Scient ology, I perhapswouldn’t be here today.” What other people had found in the Catholic Church, she had foundin 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 tohelp out more until finally she signed up for two and a half years on staff. “I knew it wasvolunteer work from the start,” she added.

But she had left the church in 2005 for health reasons but remained friends with her formerScientology colleagues and still believed that Scientology did a lot of good.

Judge Régimont returned to her time as treasurer. She explained that there were two separateaccounts: for sales of books and other goods and another for the sale of services. And theywere bringing in 5,000 euros a week, she said, 30 percent of which went on commission paidfor sales.


6/157

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 Régimont seemed moreinterested 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, EastGrinstead in England; to Scientology’s Los Angeles offices.

And how much had she spent on Scientology, he asked. About 10,000 Belgian francs (250euros) she said.

Consulting the dossier, the judge reminded her about her membership of the InternationalAssociation of Scientologists (IAS) for which she had paid between 30 and 35,000 Belgianfrancs. 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 didn’t knowanything about the international situation.

Potential Trouble Source

Prosecutor Christophe Caliman picked up the questioning, asking about an ethics reportwritten up on a Scientologist who could not pay his course. “What interests me is whathappens to you when you cannot pay your debts,” said Caliman.

She could not helpwith this particular case. “It was a long time ago,” she said. She could nothelp him either, with an explanation of what PTS handling(Potential Trouble Source) was.Another defendant, Stéphane 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 andwhat you can do about it.”.

So a PTS was someone who presented a danger to himself, but mostly for the Church ofScientology? asked Judge Régimont. Someone who was PTS brought trouble not just tothemselves but also to others, their family, their friends, Stéphane explained.

“Now we are getting to the core of it,” said Judge Régimont.”

“Can you imagine a situation in which the Church ofScientology requires someone to choose between the Churchof Scientology or their family?” the judge asked.

“Is the person considered as PTS if they do everything to dissuade someone from staying inScientology?” he asked. Stéphane clarified. No, it was the Scientologist who was connected tosuch 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

http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11_4.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11_3.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11_3.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11_3.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11_4.htm


7/157

suppressive person. He is called a potential trouble source because he can be a lot of troubleto himself and to others.”

“So the PTS person has to follow a course to face up to this threat?” asked the judge.

“No,” said Stéphane. “The first thing you do is help that person resolve the situation with thehelp of an ethics officer.”

“This is too complicated for me,” Judge Régimont remarked. “I don’t have a Scientologyinterpreter.”

He tried again: suppose you have a husband who is outraged at the Scientology courses hiswife 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 Stéphane.

“You see? I’m making progress!” said the judge.

“She wants to continue in Scientology; he … wants her to leave the Church of Scientology,”Stéphane continued.

“So she needs to choose between her family and Scientology,” Judge Régimont continued. “Isthis 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 choiceof 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 Stéphane.

But that was part of Hubbard’s arsenal, said th e judge. Yes, said Stéphane: but this was anextreme scenario. “I have never advised someone to leave their family. We try to doeverything 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 itmean to be put in a condition of emergency in Scientology, he wanted to know. “Is this notwhat happens when rules are not followed?”

Yes, she replied, but that had no consequence.

Judge Régimont reminded her that she was accused of being a member of a criminalorganisation. How did she feel about that?

She laughed, She had taken the job as treasurer because there was no else available who coulddo it. So far as criminal association was concerned, “There was no intention to cheat anyoneat all.”

http://www.scientologycourses.org/courses-view/conditions/step/read-conditions-formulas.htmlhttp://www.scientologycourses.org/courses-view/conditions/step/read-conditions-formulas.htmlhttp://www.scientologycourses.org/courses-view/conditions/step/read-conditions-formulas.htmlhttp://www.scientologycourses.org/courses-view/conditions/step/read-conditions-formulas.html


8/157

“But supposing,” said the judge, “that the court considers that in some way the globalorganisation 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. “Thateveryone 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 wasdone.”

Judge Régimont had the clerk make a note: “Madame confirms that she was subordinate tocertain people--” but there was an objection from the defence, so he rephrased. “She wasunder the supervision of certain people.

Court adjourned for lunch.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choosenot to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to waituntil the judgment. It seems only fair to respect that convention.

Photo, Jean Housen, Galeries de façade du palais de Justice de Bruxelles. Wikimedia CC Licence.

3. Scientology's 'Gentle Ethics'

A former president of Scientology in Belgium defended itsconception of ethics at the trial of the Church in Brussels.


9/157

Day One: Judge Régimont and a former president of Scientology in Belgium could not agreeon what role the movement’s s ystem of ethics played in the organisation.

With the start of Monday afternoon’s session, a former president of the Church ofScientology, was called to the stand.

Vincent G., 48, dressed in a light-grey suit struck a more confident figure than his predecessorat the stand. In his replies to the Judge Régimont, he was courteous to a fault: but he stuck tohis 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, whenhe was studying chemistry and microbiology back in 1990.

“I had a friend with whom I didn’t always get on,” he explained. “One day he ca me along andsomething had changed [about him]: he explained that he had met some people who had givenhim communications courses.

“The next day, I went to the Church of Scientology and took some courses, and I found agroup, a true group, and I really lik ed that.” Fairly quickly, he said, he committed to being astaff member.

So were the courses you took charged for? asked the judge

A few thousand Belgian francs, replied Vincent.

“And that didn’t 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,” -- andtrained as an auditor, the person who conducts Scientology’s style of counselling.

And was he still active in Scientology? Judge Régimont asked. Absolutely, said Vincent, in

Lausanne. And as a staff member you don’t 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 aminister 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 areonly 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 youcould train yourself in Scientology using check-sheets.

http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htm


10/157

“So it’s 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 20years 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 inthe bookshop for a year, before going to the United States for a year. Between 1994-99 he hadleft 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 Church’s activities andalso served as the ethics officer: part of his duties were to ensure that everyone was doingtheir job properly. Then in 2000 he took on the role of president of the Church of Scientologyof 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-profitassociation (ASBL), he was also its religious leader.

And who did he get his orders from? asked Judge Régimont.

“As a director I received my orders instructions from Hubbard.”

The judge almost managed a double-take. “Not Hubbard! --” Scientology’s founder had, afterall, 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 serviceswere delivered in an orthodox manner.

And what did it mean, the judge asked, when he read in the case files about the need forexpansion?

“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 thedistributions of leaflets and the sale of books.

“Does expansion mean more members and so more money?” asked the judge. Yes, Vincentreplied.

And was he getting this message from “on high” somewhere, the judge asked facetiously. Notall, Vincent replied: though Scientology did have the notion of God as present in the EighthDynamic.

“I assumed the responsibility to ensure that things went well,” he added. “I didn’t receive any mystical orders from Los Angeles.”

“You have to get your instructions from orders,” said the judge. “Or do you just do what youfeel are Hubbard’s 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 writtenin the works of Ron Hubbard.

http://www.freedommag.org/issue/201410-created-equal/what-is-scientology/the-eight-dynamics.htmlhttp://www.freedommag.org/issue/201410-created-equal/what-is-scientology/the-eight-dynamics.htmlhttp://www.freedommag.org/issue/201410-created-equal/what-is-scientology/the-eight-dynamics.htmlhttp://www.freedommag.org/issue/201410-created-equal/what-is-scientology/the-eight-dynamics.html


11/157

During the time when he wasn’t 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 happenif, for example, people just stopped coming in.

“That hasn’t happened, thank God,” said Vincent. That was a hypothetical situation he hadtrouble getting to grips with.

And what about Scientology ethics, the judge wanted to know. One got the impression that foreach thing there was a prescribed way of doing things -- and a prescribed list of sanctions toofor every offence, whether it was being rude or failing to listen to an auditor. And it would allgo in your file.

“How does that square with the mission to help people?” asked Judge Régimont.

“I would agree if that was the case, if that was what had happened,” said Vincent. But, headded: “I have never seen the kind of thing that you speak of in 25 years of be ing aScientologist.”

Scientology ethics "...is something very gentle, progressiveand is designed to help people advance to superior levels"

But these were in the case files, from Hubbard’s policy letters, Judge Régimont objected. Hemight not think that this was part of Scientology, but the complaints that had been filed in thiscase 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 inharmony in a group,” he explained. It was all set out in Hubbard’s 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 superiorlevels,” he explained. “If you take one case out of context you are going to reach the wrongconclusions. But if you take the ensemble of cases, you get a quite different picture… Ethicsis only a tiny fraction of Scientology.”

He regretted that he had not been observed, working in his “natural habitat”, he added. “Youcan 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 haven’tunderstood the whole story,” said Judge Régimont, with more than a hint of scepti cism.

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 oflooking at his watch; the second time he might make an observation; but the third time he


12/157

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 wa s the pointof such a file, he wanted to know. Wasn’t it a bit like a criminal record, with the penaltiesincreasing 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 thatshowed him in a good light. “There are lots of positive things.”

Like the fact that someone denounced another student for having arrived late? the judgesuggested. “Sorry to go on about it, but it is revealing, after all. Is the act of denouncingsomeone in that way normal?”

“We don’t deal in gossip,” said Vincent. “If you see something that is not right, your write itup -- and each report is in duplicate -- and that avoids gossip, as that creates a badatmosphere.

“In the book Introduction to Scientology Ethics [by the movement’s founder, Hubbard] thereis 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 preclearfolders? the judge asked. And could he give a concrete example of the good things to befound in an ethics file?

Vincent mentioned one occasion when he had taken the time to distribute copies of aScientology booklet,The Way to Happiness , “That is something positive that would be in myethics file,” he explained.

“So something positive is doing what is expected of you,” said the judge. And what otherexamples: denouncing someone for being late?

Vincent protested: he had not proposed that as a positive element, like the example he hadgiven.

“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 Régimont didnot seem satisfied with the defendant’s attempts to portray the ethics file in a more positivelight.


13/157


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 ofcontext and are just a few elements in a much bigger puzzle, aScientologist 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 urgedthem to put things in context: to look at the bigger picture they were missing.

Judge Yves Régimont asked him much money had he put into Scientology, he asked. Vincentsaid 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,” Vincentreplied.

The judge was interested in the IAS and how it connected to the Church of ScientologyBelgium. Vincent explained that it was set up by Hubbard to bring together Scientologistsaround 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 itsfounder, 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 Scientology’s VolunteerMinisters, who were active in New York, for example, in the aftermath of the 2001 September11 attacks. The IAS also supported Criminon, a rehabilitation programme for prisoners.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coupole_du_Palais_de_Justice.jpghttp://www.iasmembership.org/http://www.iasmembership.org/https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coupole_du_Palais_de_Justice.jpg


14/157

“They are connecte d to Scientology but totally independent of the churches, which apply thewritings 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 fortheir courses and materials, they were paying for IAS membership, which almost made it lookas if they were paying twice over.

Pressed by the judge, Vincent said he had donated something like $40,000 to the IAS over 25years. (At first he had said euros, but later corrected himself.) But membership was notcompulsory, he repeated.

“Why pay all that money when you could spend 25 euros on a

sauna?” Judge Régimont asked about the Purification Rundown, a programme devised by Hubbardhimself designed to clear the body of toxins: it comprises sessions of running, theconsumption of increasing quantities of vitamins and minerals and periods in a sauna.

And was the Rundown indispensable for a Scientologist? Vincent explained that Scientologyhad what was called the Bridge to Total Freedom: the Purification Rundown was one of thesteps on that bridge.

And how much did it cost? Around 2,000 euros, said Vincent.

And why did it involve taking suchhigh levels of vitamins and minerals? “The effects are notinsignificant, and people have had problems with this,” said Judge Régimont.

Certainly, some people have said that they felt very good afterwards, he added: but there, youwere moving towards the practice of medicine. (Illegal practice of medicine is one of thecharges the Church of Scientology in Belgium is fighting.)

“I have done the programme and I am fine,” said Vincent. He described the routine he hadfollowed: 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 until4:00 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. Hehad re-experienced the sensation of the dental anaesthetic used on him when he was 15, as ithad been sweated out during the Rundown, he said.

Judge Régimont was sceptical. Having established that Vincent had been 23 years old whenhe had done the Rundown, he did not see how anaesthetic absorbed all those years earliercould have been eliminated during the process.

And then there was the cost: did Vincent not think 2,000 euros was excessive for a fewgrammes of vitamins and a few hours in the sauna?


15/157

In fact, you had to buy the vitamins separately, said Vincent. But so far as the cost of theRundown was concerned, the question of whether it was expensive was entirely subjective, headded: the programme formed part of his [religious] beliefs.

“The vitamins and minerals extra?!” exclaimed the judge. “Ah!”

Judge Régimont returned to the question of the Personality Test used by Scientology, alsoknown as the Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA) test. The investigators had talked to peoplewho had turned up at Scientology’s building and the first thing they had been asked to do wasto fill in this questionnaire. He wanted to know more about the role it played inside themovement.

The test, said Vincent, was a way of showing people how they might improve But newcomerscould 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 hadentered Scientology, but after you had done a few courses: perhaps a year or two down theroad. It was part of one’s 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 iswhat is true for you,” he said, quoting one of Hubbard’s dictums. But he added: “If you arethe 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 hehad, he said. “Scientologists are completely alert and self -determined,” he said. They werenothing like the zombies they were sometimes portrayed as.

"No one has ever been forced"

After a pause, Monday after noon’s proceedings resumed, and Christophe Caliman for the prosecution got his turn to put questions, documents to hand. It wasn't long before thetemperature 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 contributewithout wanting to? I don’t see how.”

Caliman began quoting from one of the thousands Scientology documents seized during theinvestigation. It appeared to be an internal discussion of how to get someone to buy morecourses, and the terminology was less than ecclesiastical. There was talk of using the resultsfrom the personalitytest to “handle” someone and “close” so that they paid up; of gettingsomeone “routed for regging” for the Bridge.


16/157

There was mention of someone who was ex-directory, so the instruction was to get them inand signed up for an auditing package, “...and then you close for the full auditing bridge.” Hewas not to be allowed to leave until he had got all the credit together for a full loan, the memocontinued.

Caliman quoted a policy letter from Hubbard, the gist of which was that you got someone’smoney 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, hesaid: he had written it as a wish-list for the weeks to come, the next stage on the Bridge toTotal Freedom forthe people mentioned. “This document has no other use but to bring itabout that people advance up the Bridge.

“It is poorly phrased,” he acknowledged: and not in religious language But it was written forthe 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 boughtanything in the weeks that followed.

Judge Régimont 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 tomake 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 Régimont did not seem convinced. “This looks rather like a list of people who havereached a certain level … and you have to make them pay more. It is not really a question ofthe 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. Differentreligions had different ways of raising money: some required a 10 percent tithe of members’income, for example. Scientology’s system of finance was completely different. But it wasstill the choice of individuals as to whether or not they did these courses.

“Is this not a bit contradictory?” Judge Régimont asked, referring back to their earlierdiscussion about how much it cost to practise Scientology. “It is a bit of a religion for therich,” he suggested.

“You can do it for free,” said Vincent insisted.

“That is the theory,” the judge replied.


17/157

The prosecutor, Caliman, resumed his questioning.

“What happens when you want a refund?” he asked. “Is it looked on favourably or is it asuppressive act?” (Suppressive acts are the most serious offences in Scientology’s system ofethics.)

“Neither one nor the other,” said Vincent. “But I have never had to give a refund.”

Judge Régimont stepped in again. Could one say that the more one pays, the faster one rose inScientology? Not necessarily, Vincent replied.

The prosecutor, Caliman, referred to a document in which a Scientology official wasresponding to a request for a refund. In the reply, the official said that what he was asking forwas a suppressive act and that if he did not withdraw his request it would be sent upstairs toAOSH (Advanced Organization Saint Hill).

This looked very much as if the request for a refund was being met with the threat of beingdeclared 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 o f the ethics code, personally that doesnot seem to me to be correct. There are an ensemble of factors to take into account to helpsomeone 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 acolleague, 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 adesignated 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 policiesthat created them.

Again, said Vincent, it was a question of perspective. “Ethics should be seen as a whole, “ heargued. “If you take one incident out of context, you only have one piece of the puzzle.” Asfor 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 onVaquette, a kind of Scientology disciplinary hearing against him. In it, he had required otherScientologists to write up knowledge reports on the accused -- tell Scientology what theyknew about Vaquette. And anyone who did not do that, the document continued, would beconsidered an accomplice and there would be “sanctions”.

“There is a piece of the puzzle,” said Caliman. “What is the meaning of this general call fordenunciation?” Or was it, as Hubbard had once put it, to “put a head on a pike”? That lastremark 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


18/157

refused to follow this system, “...and then he decided this was not a game worth playing andhe came back on the path.”

But in reading out that document, said Vincent, the prosecutor had chosen instead to stress themost negative aspects of the affair.

Judge Régimont stepped in again: “You keep giving a different presentation of what iswritten. ‘That is not something that we meant to say’.” Perhaps then, people should take morecare with what they were writing. The meaning of these documents seemed fairly clear to theinvestigators, 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 whichthings returned to normal."

“We’re 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 prosecution’s portrayal of Scientology ethics, he offered a personal anecdote to show how it had put him onthe right path. When he was running his own business he had submitted a false taxdeclaration. But once he considered the matter in Scientology terms -- once he had appliedethics 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 ofdefrauding a certain number of people.”

Vincent had chosen his life in Scientology, said Régimont. But not everyone chose to stay inthe movement and some appeared to have had great difficulty leaving.

“I don’t think you can take as an example three or four people out of thousands,” saidVincent.

“So they are liars, then?” asked the j udge.

“No, discontented,” Vincent replied. “You can listen to them but you need also to listen to thethousands of happy Scientologists.”

Caliman, the prosecutor, broke in again. “You haven’t answered my question. Do people joinstaff freely?” And he refer red to another document, in which it appeared as if a Scientologistwas 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 can’t answer for her.” Butreferring to the document, he conceded: “We could have been more clear.”


19/157

But Judge Régimont was losing patience. “We’re speaking French here, we’re not speakingScientologese.” Each time a passage from a document was read out , he was saying it was

poorly phrased, that it wasn’t 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 phrasedand don't necessarily mean --

-- what the Monsieur the Prosecutor thinks they do. This last was from Xavier Magnée,something of a legend in the Belgian legal world. Theeminence grise was one of the biggerguns in a heavy-calibre arsenal of defence lawyers.

"We are talking about a church… a religion" Vincent's own lawyer, Maître 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 takeresponsibility for them."

“So for you,” said the judge, “the charges of extortion, fraud, the illegal practice of medicineand 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 hadalready expressed shock at the fact that the police, during their investigation of the case, hadseized 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, forexample, amassed considerable wealth.

“I think it’s a fair sum, in any case!” Judge Régimont remarked. But Scientology wasn’t doingso 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 fromits 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 otherreligions. But there were a lot of similarities too.

Maître Adrien Masset, who is defending Scientology’s European Office for Public Affairs andHuman 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 adifferent way than the Catholic Church,” he said.

“We are talking about a lot money here,” said the judge.

Maître Masset did not entirely agree. “We are talking about a church that is a religion, and ifyou leave that out then you are missing the point.”


20/157

And with that, the first day’s proceedings ended.


Photo of Brussels court interior courtesy of Jean Housen, Creative Commons licence

5. The IAS: funding Scientology's goodworks

The International Association of Scientologists supportsScientology's good works around the world, a defendant toldthe Belgian trial of the Church.At the beginning of Tuesday’s 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; andVictoria 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 Régimont, after having established that none of them had been personallyaffected by the Church of Scientology in Belgium or any of the individual defendants, said hewas obliged to refuse them. While their information might have been pertinent during theinvestigation, the stories they had to tell did not fit the framework of the current trial, heexplained.

There was no word, meanwhile, of another man who had turned up a day earlier at the start ofthe 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 withScientology or withdrew of their own accord.


21/157

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 thoseevents 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 otherinterpreters assisting two defendants with English translations, the proceedings wereaccompanied by a steady background whisper in the different languages.

Judge Régimont started by asking the defendant to explain how she had got involved inScientology.

“I worked in a computer company and they sent us to follow courses and that is when I got toknow 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: translatingCatholic values to modern life was no easy task.

“I read several [Scientology] books on how to lead a happy life and that interested meenormously, so shetook me to a conference at the Church,” she continued. “And there, Ifound an approach that suited me better than my Catholic upbringing.

“So I signed up for two basic courses: Overcoming Ups and Downs in Lifeand How to RaiseYour Integrity,” she said. These basic courses gave her what she needed to decide whether ornot Scientology was for her.

She decided it was: because while she was young, had a good job and plenty of friends, shestill 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. Andwhile you were doing the auditing courses, were you advised to go further? No, said Hilde, itwas me who decided to go further.

“Scientology contains an enormous amount of things, but Mr. Hubbard, in his Bridge to TotalFreedom, 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 wasn’t until 1999 that she signed up on staff for four years becau se they had urgent need ofa Flemish speaker.

Four years? asked the judge. Not two-and-a-half or five, which he had understood to be thestandard terms? That was true, she said: but towards the end of her contract she had had towithdraw because of health problems.

http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_6.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_6.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_6.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_6.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_6.htmhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/suppression/sh11.htm


22/157

While on staff, she said, she was out at a lot of book fairs and conferences, informing peopleabout Scientology. She and her colleagues had also organised a big Scientology exhibitionwhere they got to show the Church’s activities.

“And in the C hurch 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 lotof 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. Hisdesignated replacement was not yet trained up for the job, so she stepped in as president anddirector 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 assistantswho 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 festivalsand every two years going to the centre at Copenhagen or over to Los Angeles for advancedcourses.

And how much had she spent on Scientology over the years? the judge asked. Around 40,000euros, which over a period of 20 years came to around 2,000 a year, said Hilde. And in theyears 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, auditingand Scientology materials such as Hubbard’s writings.

Judge Régimont wanted to know more about the IAS. Hilde explained it was an organisationof 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 thathappen 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 thehumanitarian works that the IAS does.” “And how much did you invest in the IAS?” the judge asked. Around 25,000 euros over 20years, 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?” heasked.

There were different levels of membership, she said: you could be a member for free for sixmonths; and you could be a Life Patron for $20,000.


23/157

But she had paid $5,000 more than that, the judge noted. And that was only up to 1999. Atthat time, she said, she and Vincent G. were together, so they were listed as a couple. but theylater separated.

“So you are no longer a Patron?” asked the judge. That struck Judge Régimont as a littleunfair. “You should make a claim about that,” he suggested. Hilde demurred. “What is important for me is to be able to contribute to the humanitarianworks that the IAS does.”

The judge wanted to know whether Hilde had held the posts of director of the Church ofScientology Belgium and religious director in the Scientology Org chart. The first post is oneof 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 byHubbard, 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 topof that, she had also been responsible for public relations. Her exceptional workload was oneof 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 whenhe was in the post of president he had simply applied the writings of the founder, L. RonHubbard: 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 wasalways 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 tookcare of reception, or cleaned the hallway -- that was a decision taken by a few people. And formore important decisions, such as paying the bills, there were my three advisors.”

Then Judge Vérimont 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 choosenot to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to waituntil the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.

Photo of the Palais de Justice Interior, Brussels, Lawrence F White, CC Licence.

https://www.byline.com/project/28/article/533https://www.byline.com/project/28/article/533https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palais_de_Justice_Interior.JPGhttps://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palais_de_Justice_Interior.JPGhttps://www.byline.com/project/28/article/533


24/157

6. Questions of Privacy

Day Two of the Belgian trial of Scientology: the judgequestioned one defendant closely about the highly personalinformation investigators had found in members’ files. Having listened to the defendant Hilde N.* outline her progress through Scientology duringher 22 years with the Church, Judge Vérimont turned to the heart of the case, as it concernedher. She was accused of violating the rules regarding Belgium’s privacy laws. Did she haveanything she wanted to say to that?

There was no data gathered or recorded, said Hilde.

“Quand même !” 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 computerfiles, he said.

Preclear files contain the notes taken by Scientology’s auditors, or counsellors, during theirauditing sessions with other Scientologists. Their contents often contain the kind of deeply

personal information one might find in a therapist’s notes (or, to use an analogy thatScientologists would doubtless prefer, the kind of thing a Catholic priest might hear duringconfession). Life histories can also contain the intimate details of a Scientologist’s private life.

Hilde explained that she was not an auditor – the kind of Scientologist who dealt with suchfiles – but she had read the writings of Mr. Hubbard about how to arrive at a higher religiousawareness.

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, thennever 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 theirsearches of the Scientology offices and found private information on Scientologists both inthe physical documents and in computer files. “So for you everything was in accordance withBelgian law?”

http://www.scientology.org/faq/scientology-and-dianetics-auditing/what-do-the-terms-preclear-and-auditor-mean.htmlhttp://www.scientology.org/faq/scientology-and-dianetics-auditing/what-do-the-terms-preclear-and-auditor-mean.htmlhttp://www.scientology.org/faq/scientology-and-dianetics-auditing/what-do-the-terms-preclear-and-auditor-mean.html


25/157

She mentioned another defendant, Myriam Z., saying that she had worked with specialistlawyers at the time to ensure that everything was in order. “For my part,” she added, “I havefull confidence that everything was done according to the rules – and I should say that thePreclear 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 confidedduring the sessions. “I myself have never been an auditor but I have often been audited.” Shecould assure the judge that these people were professionals. She was quite comfortableconfiding her intimate secrets to them and she had full confidence in the support the auditor provided.

It was nevertheless astonishing, said Judge Régimont, 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 togather 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 putin place. But in any case, she wasn’t sure she saw the problem: given the nature of auditingafter all, everyone knew what was in their file.

In auditing, as she had experienced it, she explained, “...if there is a good contact between theauditor and the person being audited, I can tell details of my private life, sexual life and myconcept of life and the auditor can know it but I know what he knows because it was memyself 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 herauditor, 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 andthe why of things,” she replied. “And I know that when I start an auditing session the auditorwill 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 betterand to help you find your own answers. Scientology is there to help people – and you canalways help people. You can give someone who is hungry a fish, or you can teach them tofish,” she added.

“That’s Catholicism!” said the judge, to laughter.

“I’m 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 incase of need there was a witness. And nobody was forced to go further than they wanted to. “I


26/157

also have friends whohave shown some interest, but have said they didn’t want to be auditedand so they have done a book or a course,” she added.

Then Judge Régimont got down to specifics. Did she know of the BZ family? This wouldhave been between 2000 and 2003, he said. She said she did remember them and recalled they

had been Scientologists for years.One of the family’s children, it seemed had wanted to take the Personality Test at a time whenshe was minor. Hilde it seemed, had had her sit the test: but since the girl concerned was stilla 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 hadtaken 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 wasa Flemish-speaker, which meant she would not have been dealing with them. “So it was notme. It was another Hilde.”

And the person who had shown the girl one of the introductory films at the centre, the judgeasked: that wasn’t her either? At the time, she said, she did not speak enough French to beable to deal with a French-speaking family, she said. She named another colleague who wouldhave taken care of them.

“The father and the mother and the brother did courses with us,” she recalled. In themeantime, the youngest, a girl, was getting bored. “I remember she helped us put mailings inan envelope and then she asked to see a film, because she was bored.”

“That is not what you said at the time,” said Judge Régimont. Years earlier, when she had been questioned by investigators, she had given a more detailed explanation of how one of thesons had seen a film on Dianetics, become interested and come to her to ask about details; andthat she had started him on it after getting the consent of his parents.

“Now, for someone who didn’t speak French, that is a fairly detailed statement,” the judgeremarked.

What the judge had to bear in mind, she said, was that between Scientologists a lot of thecommunication 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 tothem, English or French.

“I’m 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 didn’t actively ta kecare of these people.”

So the facts alleged against her as the prosecution had laid them out: so far as she hadconcerned, this was pure fantasy, nothing to do with what happened?


27/157

“ Monsieur Le Président , as a good citizen and a good Scientologist, if I committed a fault Iwant to assume my criminal responsibility. But in my soul and in all good conscience, as aScientologist 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 bette r 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 hisquestions.

* While Belgian law allows me to identify the defendants, most of the news media here choosenot to do that. After consulting with local colleagues, I was told that the convention is to waituntil the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.

Image credit: Palais De Justice, Brusselsvia free images(license)

7. "Unfair! Unfair!"

Day Two of the Belgian Scientology trial. Defence lawyersclashed with the prosecutor as he read from Scientology policyletters relating to its disciplinary systemThere were two state prosecutors at the trial of Scientology: Christophe Caliman, who hadfollowed the investigation for more than a decade; and Jean-Pascal Thoreau, who as well ashandling 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 a15-percent commission for the courses and materials that she had sold. Caliman asked herabout 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 afew years, said Hilde. But if you did want to spread the word about Scientology, you couldsell Hubbard’s books and other materials to friends and family. “Mr. Ron Hubbard developeda system to reward people like that.”

https://www.flickr.com/photos/51035539967@N01/7772964204http://www.imageslike.com/http://www.imageslike.com/http://www.imageslike.com/http://www.imageslike.com/https://www.flickr.com/photos/51035539967@N01/7772964204


28/157

Once she had completed her commitments as a member of staff, she became a Field StaffMember, “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 becausethat was also their role: it was a kind of “buddy” system, in which the more experiencedScientologist gave her protégé the benefit of her experience.

Earlier, said Caliman, she had spoken of consent forms. Why were they required? Hilde saidshe 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?” heasked. Judge Régimont stepped in: this was a reference to the consent forms that memberssigned relating to the data gathered during auditing sessions. “Why do you sign consentforms?”

“I have to think,” she replied. “It’s 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 consentforms was one of the changes she had made to bring the situation into conformity with thelaw, acting on the advice of a team of lawyers

“We mad e sure that before people received religious courses, they had to know what theywere 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 sheherself had been helped; that everything was done on a voluntary basis and that one couldaccept 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 beingaudited; it was not about collecting data, she said. So if she was being audited, it was notabout the auditor wanting to learn things about her; it was her wanting to have a chance ofseeing 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 – “Excuseme,” he said, correcting himself – the prosecutor was asking afairly clear question. “Can a

person in auditing say ‘I am not answering that question’. Yes or no? I think the question isclear 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 don’t know,” she answered: she was not qualified in that area.

“ Déloyale! ” a defence lawyer protested.

https://www.byline.com/project/28/article/549https://www.byline.com/project/28/article/549


29/157

The prosecutor Caliman, referring to a document, quoted a Hubbard Communications OfficePolicy Letter (HCOPL),one of those that Scientology’s founder Hubbard had written settingout 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 ethicsofficer. In Scientology, ethics officers ensure that Hubbard’s 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“ Déloyale !” (unfair) and more than one lawyer stepped forward, in a bid to address the court.

One lawyer protested that this document, from the prosecutor’s vast stock of paperwork, hadnothing to do with this particular defendant. His point seemed to be that two separate criminalinvestigations had been merged into the single trial: but this document appeared to be fromthe part that did not concern Hilde N.

Maître Pierre Monville stood up to express what a number of his colleagues on the defenceside seemed to think. “The lawyers in the Cause Two are not concerned by the elements ofCause One,” he said.

This wasdéloyale , unfair, on the part of the prosecutor, he added, and he was giving fairwarning that it wasdélicat – 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 hadsight of them. “And if he raises this in his closing argument, it is a problem.”

Judge Régimont intervened. He thought that the prosecutor had referred to this in anotherdocument that concerned Me. Monville’s case papers. He nevertheless noted the object ion,without ruling one way or another. But it was clear to him, he added, that a defendant couldnot answer to something in the part of the case that did not concern them.

Judge Régimont dictated one of his regular memos to the court clerk to the effect that thedefence formally objected to the document being attached to the file. “It is not as if he came tocourt with a document that is not known,” he added. But the defence position was that thisdocument had no standing in this context. “I understand your reaction,” he told the defencelawyers. 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 wouldattack him on procedural grounds if he tried to use this document against this client. Calimanwas unrepentant. He had produced the text for the convenience of everyone, he said, waving itat them.

“ Déloyale! ” protested a defence lawyer.

He may only have quoted extracts of these documents, he said, but these texts existed andmany of them appeared in Hubbard’s book Introduction to Scientology Ethics . The text wasamong the documents seized by investigators and had been entered into the record: “And thisis what Scientologists spend their lives studying,” he added.

There were several more minutes of back and forth with that, as Me. Monville, for thedefence, suggested, with the greatest possible respect of course, that Monsieur Le Procureur


30/157

was trying to pull a fast one. It was not acceptable for the prosecutor to cherry-pick passagesfrom Hubbard’s writings (in what was already a massive file) and try to impose hisinterpretation 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 takeheed of their formal objection. And if he was going to quote any more such passages, thedefence 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 legalrobes: “I have no problem with that,” he said. “My aim is not to ambush the defence.”

“I’m sure the defence will be putting its side,” said Judge Régimont. But again, he took noteof the objections.

The message was clear on both sides: the prosecution would be making full use of theHubbard letters that Hubbard had written and which had been seized during the police raids ofScientology offices. For him and his colleague Thoreau, these documents told a different storyto the one the defendants had so far advanced.

For its part, the defence would be formally objecting to any attempt to bring documents fromone half of the investigation over to the other as that would prejudice the right of their clientsto a fair trial; and they would challenge any partial interpretation of Hubbard’s writingsadvanced 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 takenagainst parishioners during her presidency.

And then he referred to another document from the thousands seized by investigators: in thisone, the defendant had signed an ethics order putting staff in a Condition of Danger becauseits stats were down. (Caliman did not explain, but the Condition of Danger is part of the ethicsconditions devised by Hubbard.) There was mention too of Overts and Withholdsand a reportto an ethics officer.

Caliman asked: Did these documents not contradict her testimony?

“I was not informed of that document and I don’t remember it either,” she replied. “and I wantto add what M. [Vincent] G. said yesterday: we first of all need to put things in context.” Sheno longer knew what that context was, she said “...and for the rest, I no longer remember.”She was referring to the arguments about contextadvanced by her fellow defendant VincentG. on the first day of the trial.

As he did for any point he thought especially worthy of attention, Judge Régimont had thecourt clerk record the exchange. “After a question put by the Prosecutor relating to an ethicsorder signed by Hilde N., the defendant no longer remembers what it is about, nor the context.

Noté .”

http://www.scientologycourses.org/courses-view/conditions/step/read-conditions-formulas.htmlhttp://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_2.htmhttps://www.byline.com/project/28/article/537https://www.byline.com/project/28/article/537http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/integrity/sh9_2.htmhttp://www.scientologycourses.org/courses-view/conditions/step/read-conditions-formulas.html


31/157

“She is credible,” said her lawyer. “What she said then iswhat she says now.”

Now it was the turn of her lawyer, Maître Johan Scheers.

During the legal arguments earlier, Me. Scheers had been checking his files. He reminded thecourt that he had argued during procedural hearings in theChambre de Conseil that precededthe 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 hadfound the transcript of what she had told investigators and, contrary to what the prosecutorseemed 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. Sofar 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 hadtaken 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 thatquestion 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 havespoke to the family in English rather than French.

He had one question that he would like to put to his client, he said. Judge Régimont had noobjection, and relayed the question: it was simply to establish that she had not been active onstaff in Scientology in 2003: that she had written two letters of resignation at the end of 2002asking 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 problemshave anything to do with Scientology’s Purification Rundown? None, she confirmed. Thequestion was important given that some of the defendants are on trial for the illegal practice ofmedicine.

Before she stepped down from the stand, she made a point of thanking her interpreters fortheir 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 waituntil the judgment. It seems only reasonable to respect that practice.

Image credit: Wenn Sich Die Gerechtigkeit So Aufbläht, Wohnt Dort Wohl Eher Die Machtvia free images(license)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/26480501@N06/7020727285http://www.imageslike.com/http://www.imageslike.com/http://www.imageslike.com/https://www.flickr.com/photos/26480501@N06/7020727285


32/157

8. "Who decides?"

Day Two of the Belgian Scientology trial: The judgequestioned one defendant closely about the e-meter, a deviceused during Scientology counselling; and on the Church’sPurification Rundown.The next defendant to be questioned was Patricia R.*, who explained that she had been aScientologist, off and on, since 1997, having worked contracts as an auditor and coursesupervisor.

During her time on the stand, Patricia was not particularly forthcoming. It was not that shewas being deliberately unhelpful: more that she seemed to have trouble understanding someof the questions. Her answers tended to be short, and not always to the point.

Judge Régimont, referring back to the questions put to the previous defendant on the stand,asked her if people being audited could say they didn’t want to answer an auditor’s q uestion.

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 withoutsaying 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 doesn’t work like that. An auditor puts a question and perhaps the PC [preclear; the person being counselled] is notinterested and the PC is not obliged to answer.” There weredifferent kinds of auditing and different kinds of questions you could put, she added.

In response to further questioning, she said that Hubbard’s book, Dianetics, talked aboutauditing. She also said that two people could do auditing by themselves without having to

come into the church.


33/157

That struck the judge as strange, given that auditing appeared to be a relatively directedspiritual programme. That’s how it was sometimes, Patricia answered. She had been a low-level 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 thatit was only for five years?” She had not known, she said: but she was not especially bothered. She didn’t do auditing any more.

The judge asked her about the electropsychometer, or e-meter, the device used in Scientologyauditing. He wanted to know how itworked, but she didn’t know.

“I’m not an expert,” she said. “But I can tell you that an e -meter itself does nothing.”

“That’s 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 everytime, or what? Judge Régimont wanted to be clearer on how it worked.

“Everyone is different,” said Patricia. “I am someone who reacts easily, so it may reactdifferently for me.”

So, the judge asked: the same question can make the e-meter react differently, depending onwho’s answering? Yes, said Patricia.

“So then what’s 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 thequestion [asked],” said Patricia.

“So when it reacts, it’s a way for the auditor to say, ‘Ah, there is a problem’,” the judgesuggested.

“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 don’t want to restimulate,” sheadded, using a Scientology term for unlocking bad memories.

“If someone has an emotion they don’t like, they can get rid of it,” said Patricia. “The e -meteris a machine that helps you go in