FECRIS - Criminal convictions

Facts on FECRIS (pdf)

FECRIS Masters of Discrimination

Legal perspectives  on FECRIS "Legal
Plans" on "Sects".

Report on increasing Religious
Discrimination, the France - FECRIS     


ADFI: the originator of Fecris

FECRIS website.

Documented abuse case histories:
     a) France
     b) Sweden
     c) Spain



 Mr Friedrich Griess is a Vice-President of FECRIS, webmaster of the FECRIS web site and Board Member of the Austrian FECRIS group GSK (Gesellschaft Gegen Sekten Und Kultgefahren or Association against Dangers of Sects and Cults)

Mr. Griess has also been convicted for defamation against a minority religious group the following times:

1.Court case GZ: 17Cg 15/96d in Vienna Commercial court in Sept. 1996

2.Court case GZ: 17Cg 15/96d in Vienna Commercial court in March 1997:

3.Court case GZ:37Cg 77/98x in Vienna Commercial court on Sept 1998

4.Court case GZ: 17 O 85/98 in Stuttgart County Court in Germany – June 1998:

5.Court case GZ: 37Cg 19/00y in Vienna Commercial court in March 2000

6.Court case GZ: 8E 3407/00 w in Klosterneuburg District Court

7.Judgment procedure GZ 8F 2687/02 s-3 in Klosterneuburg District Court

8.Copyright violation case in Korneuburg County Court GZ 16Cg 115/02 (for using copyright materials of the Smithpeople (a Christian minority group present in over 60 countries), translating it and disseminating it without having the right to do this).

9.The last court case is from March 2004 – where Mr. Griess again defamed this group. 

 Many of these court rulings were settlements in front of the court, where Griess agreed not to repeat false statements, yet he continued to do this. Further information can be found at www.norweger.at


Cyril Vosper –  FAIR (FECRIS member):

In the District Court of Walheim, Germany on 29th December 1987 FAIR (Fecris member group) conviction illustrates the early support of this movement for deprogramming.

Cyril Vosper, at the time Board member of FAIR, was convicted in Germany for false imprisonment and causing bodily harm. The sentence passed on Vosper was 5 months suspended for 3 years. During his summation the judge Dr Wanner, who presided over the case said freedom of religion is a basic civil right and it was completely unacceptable for Vosper to have transgressed this basic human right.  Vosper emigrated to Australia soon after this incident. 

Ian Haworth - Cult Information Centre (Fecris member):

Ian Hayworth is a FECRIS founding member and runs the Cult Information Center. He has a court decision against him on 26 Oct 1989 when the Supreme Court of Ontario (Canada) ruled against Mr. Hayworth and ordered that he pay $10,000 of damages for libel against a philosophical group when he was involved in a similar group in Canada.


UNADFI – French-language FECRIS groups (ADFI founded FECRIS)

(UNADFI is the national coalition group covering different regional groups in France, each of them called "ADFI" and the region or city name.) ADFI is a FECRIS member group.

 Clearly demonstrative of the inclination to hateful falsehood and misrepresentation of groups and individuals of which they are speaking are a series of convictions in France. It is quite possible there are other instances not covered below.

 1. 27th May 1992, ADFI Paris is condemned by the Paris County Court (Tribunal de Grande Instance) for defamation regarding Mrs. Josiane Henri and Mr. Ian Combe.

 2. March 1993, Paris County Court, condemnation of UNADFI in the case Courcenet/Cybele;

 3. 22nd June 1993, Janine Tavernier, president of ADFI Paris, is condemned by the Paris County Court (Tribunal de Grande Instance) for defamation regarding Mrs. Josiane Henri and Mr. Ian Combe.

 4. 4th January 1994, the Paris Court of Appeal confirms the judgment regarding the declaration of culpability of Mrs. Tavernier and regarding the punishment imposed on her by the Paris County court on 22nd June 1993.

 5. March 1994, Paris County Court, Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris, CONDEMNATION UNADFI/Tavernier v. J. Calais et Demaria/Ethique et Libert้;

 6. 15th January 1997, the Douai Court of Appeal condemns Mrs. Ovigneur-Dewynter, president of ADFI Nord, for defamation regarding the Cultural Association of the Jehovah's Witnesses in France.

 7. 29th March 2002, the Marseille County Court condemns Jacky Cordonnier, member of UNADFI and FECRIS, for defamation regarding the association of Jehovah's Witnesses.

 8. 20th November 2001, the Paris County Court condemns Janine Tavernier, president of UNADFI, for public defamation regarding Daniele Gounord, Church of Scientology.

 9. 5th February 2003, the Paris Court of Appeal confirms the judgment in the civil proceedings against Janine Tavernier and UNADFI (decisions of the Paris County Court of 20 November 2001).

 10. In July 2003, a dissolution subpoena to UNADFI/ADFI Nord for non-conformity with its statutes, Paris Court.


 Non-discrimination Supreme Court Decision

The German Federal Supreme Court gave a decision on 27 March 1992, when it decided that it would be against the law for the State to provide funding for organizations such as (FECRIS member groups) AGPF and Sect-Info Essen.  (The case was brought by the new religious movement, OSHO, Ref. Case Nr. 7C21-90LU66, see attached document).

 That AGPF and Sect-Info Essen deal with new religious movements in a way that cannot be considered objective or neutral was made clear in this decision. Following are a few examples of how the court motivated their decision.

 "According to the findings of the administrative court of appeals the interested party (AGPF) deals with the so-called new religious movements (among which is the Osho movement) in a critical or even invalidating way." (page 13 of decision)

 "The state cannot disconnect from these legal obligations by asking for the help of some private association which makes use of freedom of opinion under the constitution in a way which is close to slander. Thus the states' duty of being neutral in supporting, as in this case, as well as to prevent an arbitrary or disproportionate limitation of the basic right as per paragraph 4, is also leading to the necessity of a special legal authorization." (Page 19 of decision)

Sect-info Essen

In a final judgment on 19th December 2001 by the Munich State Court, Ms. Heide-Marie Cammans, founder of Sect-info Essen, German FECRIS group was ordered to stop repeating or spreading a wide variety of falsehoods about Takar Singh (an Eastern religious group) or else she would be fined up to 500,000 DM or, if not paid, be sentenced to jail for up to 6 months. These included such allegations as a person being criminal, torturing children and rape. The book they were distributing about the group was also forbidden to be sold.

 The name of the book was "The new prophets" (German: Die Neuen Heilsbringer, Auswege oder Wege ins Aus)

 Case Nr. Az: 908736/99 Munich I State court, 9 civil chamber (German: Landgericht Munchen I).


Examples of the bias of AGPF are further illustrated by just two examples (of which there are more) as follows:

 a) The German FECRIS member AGPF, represented by its leading member Ingo Heinemann, a board member of FECRIS, has publicly announced on the Internet that the criteria of "discrimination against religion" should be excluded from the national implementation of the European Directive on Equal Treatment in Employment (2000/43/EG, 2000/78/EG), in Germany as it could be "misused" (documentation on this can be seen on AGPFs homepage).

 AGPF promotes that "protection clauses" (these are clauses inserted into employment or job contracts that affirm the person taking the job is not a member of a religious minority) are valid to be used by companies. This explains why any anti discrimination law in alignment to EC Directive 2000/78/EC would be a "threat" for AGPF (as the promoter of such discriminatory clauses) and companies (as the clients of AGPF) following their "advise".

 b) A member group of AGPF, Forum Critical Psychology, has shown a similar anti-religious attitude, clearly communicated directly on the first page of their homepage. Christian, Islamic and Jewish symbols are shown together with a Nazi swastika being thrown into the garbage (See attached picture). A leading member of this group, Colin Goldner, also stated that he supports the idea of "zero-tolerance towards irrational elements" (Indicating religious ideas to be generally irrational).


AIS/PRO Juventud .

In 1999 a judgment issued by the European Court of Human Rights (case Nr 37680/97, Ribera Blume and others versus Spain concerning a deprogramming case) the court stated that the group AIS/Pro Juventud had a "direct and immediate responsibility for … the applicants … loss of liberty."



In 1990, two persons were sentenced to prison in connection with a violent deprogramming attempt on a member of the Hare Krishna movement. Mr. Rossi, who at the time was the spokesman for SADK spoke out loudly in favor of the deprogramming, in which the victim had been subdued with tear gas, saying "We support and approve of the deed.”



Gothenburg District Court on 1990-12-19 found FRI associate Eva Pehrsson convicted in connection with a deprogramming attempt on a member of a Christian Group, in Gothenburg Sweden (Sara Gustavsson). Eva was found to have been involved in this deprogramming and deprivation of liberty of Sara Gustavsson and ordered to pay 10,428 SEK.

A more recent kind of deprogramming-case in Sweden happened between June and August 2003 when an adult member of a free Christian Church was wrongly incarcerated in a psychiatric hospital. First the family approached FRI members Per and Gudrun Swartling and also Pether Ohlen to get him to change the belief of their son but this was unsuccessful. (From the mid 1980s Mr. Ohlen worked in affiliation with the anti-sect association FRI where he was known as a deprogrammer and spoke on the radio.) As Mr. Olsen was unable to persuade the son to leave his faith his mother arranged for him to be taken into compulsory psychiatric care. He was subsequently incarcerated under the pretext of having a (contrived) psychiatric condition called "religious delusion". Mr. Ohlen was clearly working closely with the doctors in this institution as the son was at one point given the choice of a 50% reduction in the drug that was being administered to him if he were to cooperate and "study" with Mr. Ohlen. Eventually it was arranged for an independent doctor to examine Carl-Johan. This doctor came to the conclusion that he had no psychiatric condition whatsoever and after over two months of wrongful imprisonment in a psychiatric institution, was freed from his incarceration. A complaint has been filed and is under investigation concerning this incident.