Dear Bahá'í Friends,
"The Universal House of Justice has received your letter of 26 September
1991 which raises a number of questions concerning the exercise of your
functions in situations where the Bahá'í laws are being
violated.
We have been asked to provide the following response.
"Before commenting on your specific questions, the
House of Justice feels it
would be useful to review some aspects of the role of the Local and
National
Assemblies in regulating the behaviour of the members of the
Bahá'í community.
Fostering Spiritual Development
"The aim of any Spiritual Assembly should be to
develop a warm and loving
relationship with the believers in its community, so that it can most
effectively nurture and encourage them in the acquisition of a deeper
understanding of the teachings, and can assist them to follow the
Bahá'í principles in their personal conduct. The Assembly
should
aspire to being regarded by the members of the community as a loving
parent,
wise in its understanding of the varying degrees of maturity of those
entrusted
to its care, compassionate in dealing with the problems which arise as a
result
of any shortcomings, ever prepared to guide them to the correct path, and
very
patient as they strive to effect the necessary changes in their behaviour.
Such an approach is far removed from the harshly judgemental and punitive
approach which so often characterizes the administration of law in the
wider
society. The Bahá'í application of justice, firmly rooted
in
spiritual principle and animated by the desire to foster the spiritual
development of the members of the community, will increasingly be seen as
a
distinctive and highly attractive feature of the Revelation of
Bahá'u'lláh.
Justice, Reward and Retribution
"Such an attitude of forbearance,
restraint, and patience
toward believers who are striving to change practices and attitudes
acquired in
the years before they entered the sanctuary of the Cause of God should not
blind a National Assembly to the fact that, at this stage in the
development of
the Faith, there may well be some believers in the community whose
behaviour
necessitates that they be treated in a firm and uncompromising manner.
The
following passage from a letter written on behalf of the Guardian is of
broad
applicability:
'He feels that your Assembly must keep
before its eyes the balance
specified by Bahá'u'lláh Himself, in other words, justice,
reward
and retribution. Although the Cause is still young and tender,and many of
the
believers inexperienced, and therefore loving forbearance is often called
for
in the place of harsh measures, this does not mean that a National
Spiritual
Assembly can under any circumstances tolerate disgraceful conduct,
flagrantly
contrary to our Teachings, on the part of any of its members, whoever they
may
be and from wherever they may come. . . .
'The National Assembly is the
guardian of the welfare of
the Faith, a most
sacred and heavy responsibility and one which is inescapable. They must
be
ever vigilant, ever on the look-out, ever ready to take action, and, on
all
matters of fundamental principle, refuse to compromise for an instant.
Only in
this way can the body of the Faith be free of disease.
'. . . we should not confuse the
true believers with those
who are not
quickened with the spirit of faith, have some ulterior motive, or are
indifferent to the reputation they have personally, and the damage they
may do
to the Cause in the eyes of the public. There is all the difference in
the
world between these two categories, and your Assembly must ever be
watchful and
ready to take action when necessary.'
Actions Requiring Severe Sanctions
"A survey of the letters written on
behalf of the Guardian
shows that he advised the National Spiritual Assemblies that they should
resort
to the severe sanction of deprivation of a believer's administrative
rights
only for such matters as 'disgraceful conduct, flagrantly contrary to our
Teachings', 'seriously injuring the Faith in the eyes of the public
through his
conduct or flagrantly breaking the laws of God', 'gross immorality and
open
opposition to the administrative functions of the Faith, and disregard for
the
laws of personal status', 'conduct which is disgracing the Cause', and
'breaking of laws, such as the consent of parents to marriage', or 'acts
of
such an immoral character as to damage the good name of the Faith'.
"It is clear that the removal of voting rights is a
serious action which an
Assembly should take reluctantly when the circumstances require that the
Bahá'í community or its reputation in the eyes of the public
must
be protected from the effects of an individual's behaviour, and where the
authority of the laws of the Faith must be upheld. It should be the hope
and
prayer of the Assembly that the believer who has been administratively
expelled
from membership in the Bahá'í community will come to see
that his
behaviour is in violation of the teachings, will endeavour to rectify his
conduct, and will thus open the way to being welcomed back into the
community
so that he can lend his support to the vital and glorious task of
establishing
the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh.
Violations of Civil/Criminal Law
"Turning now to your questions: you have enquired
about believers convicted of
an offence in the civil courts. As you know, the Bahá'í
institutions do not have a responsibility to enforce the criminal laws of
a
nation, although they do quite properly exhort the believer to obedience
to
government, which includes obedience to its laws. Violations of criminal
law
are handled by the civil courts of a country and enforced by its civil
administration. The fact that a believer has been charged with a criminal
offence, or is suspected of having committed such an offence, or is
convicted
by the court, should not automatically result in the application of
Bahá'í sanctions. Each case is to be considered on its own
merits, and in the light of the aforementioned considerations pertaining
to the
effect on the Bahá'í community and its reputation. For
example,
an Assembly would be most unlikely to consider imposition of sanctions on
a
Bahá'í convicted of violating the laws regulating automobile
traffic flow, but it might well consider that a person known to be a
Bahá'í convicted of selling narcotic drugs had brought
disgrace
to the name of the Faith and damaged its reputation before the public.
"When an Assembly is aware that a believer is charged
with a criminal offence,
normally it should not pass judgement on a matter until a decision has
been
given in the courts, at which time it would consider whether it should
impose
administrative sanctions. There may be cases, however, when an Assembly
is
justified in taking certain actions to protect the interests of the Cause.
Generally, the Assembly would regard the decision of the court as being
valid
in determining whether or not the Bahá'í was guilty of the
stated
offence, and would not undertake its own independent investigation.
However,
there may be special circumstances associated with a particular case, or
with
the reputation of the civil judicial system, which would incline an
Assembly to
decided that the verdict of the court should not be accepted as a basis
for
Bahá'í administrative action without further investigation
by the
Assembly; it is left to the Assembly to make that determination.
Investigating Allegations
"When an allegation is made that a believer has
violated Bahá'í
law, irrespective of the consequence in civil law, the process of
investigation
calls for a diligent and persistent effort by the Assembly to ascertain
the
facts, and the wholehearted cooperation of all concerned in the search for
truth. Believers called upon to provide information should, if necessary,
be
reminded of the responsibility they bear to speak the truth and of the
spiritual consequences of a failure to do so. 'Abdu'l-Bahá
asserts:
'Truthfulness is the foundation of all
human virtues. Without
truthfulness, progress and success, in all the worlds of God, are
impossible
for any soul. When this holy attribute is established in man, all the
divine
qualities will also be acquired.'
"If this 'holy attribute' should adorn the behaviour of believers toward
others, how much more should it characterize the statements which a
Bahá'í makes to a divinely ordained institution.
"The prospect of a believer's displaying an attitude
of hostility, when being
interviewed by a Spiritual Assembly or its representatives who are seeking
to
determine the facts of a matter, is abhorrent. All believers are strongly
enjoined to have the utmost respect for the Assemblies, to cooperate fully
with
them, and to support their decisions. An Assembly enquiring into a matter
should not allow itself to be deterred by the hostility of a believer who
is
withholding relevant information; it should appeal to him for cooperation,
remind him forcefully of his responsibilities and, in extreme cases such
as
threats made to the investigators, warn him of the administrative
consequences
of the persistence of his deplorable conduct.
Decision of the Assembly
"When an Assembly comes to the point where it must
make a decision in the face
of conflicting assertions and insistent denials, it might well recall the
advice of the Guardian:
'. . . when they are called upon to
arrive at a certain decision, they
should, after dispassionate, anxious, and cordial consultation, turn to
God in
prayer, and with earnestness and conviction and courage record their vote.
.
.'
"A believer who is distressed by the decision reached by an Assembly as a
result of its investigation may well find comfort and reassurance in the
following passage from a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi:
'The Assembly may make a mistake, but, as
the Master pointed out,
if the
community does not abide by its decisions, or the individual
Bahá'í, the result is worse, as it undermines the very
institution which must be strengthened in order to uphold the principles
and
laws of the Faith. He tells us God will right the wrongs done. We must
have
confidence in this and obey our Assemblies. . .'
Warnings Before Sanctions
"As regards the need to warn an individual before his
voting
rights are removed, the basic principle is expressed in the following
passage
written on behalf of the Guardian:
'. . .before anyone is deprived of their
voting rights, they should be
consulted with and lovingly admonished at first, given repeated warnings
if
they do not mend their immoral ways, or whatever other extremely serious
misdemeanour they are committing, and finally, after these repeated
warnings,
be deprived of their voting rights.'
"There are, however, many different ways in which this is applied,
depending
upon the nature of the offence and the situation in each case.
Isolated Offence
"For example, when there is an
isolated but serious offence,
such as that of a Bahá'í woman who indulges in one act of
immorality as a result of which she gives birth to a child out of wedlock,
this
is no grounds for the removal of administrative rights. But the Assembly,
when
it learns of the situation, should certainly arrange for the believer to
be met
and consulted with, to assist her in her difficulties, to ascertain her
attitude to the situation. If she has no regret for the offence and
indicates
that she feels free to repeat it in future, she will need to be educated
in the
teachings, counselled and, if she does not change her attitude, to be
warned
that a continuation of such actions would cause forfeiture of her
administrative rights. If, however, she is contrite and is determined to
lead
a moral life henceforth, there would be no question of sanctions. The
same
course would be followed with the man involved, if he were a
Bahá'í.
Continuing Course of Behaviour
"Another example would involve, not a
single offence, but a
continuing course of behaviour, such as flagrant and continuing violation
of
the law prohibiting the consumption of alcoholic beverages. In such a
situation the Assembly should explain the law to the believer, urge him to
obey
it, encourage and assist him and warn him if necessary. If the response
is
favourable there would, again, be no need to deprive him of his
administrative
rights, but, if the believer is obdurate or continues in his course of
misbehaviour, he should, according to the circumstances of each case, be
warned
and warned again, with increasing severity and a time set for him to
rectify
his conduct. If this produces no amelioration, he would have to lose his
administrative rights.
"A third example involves the taking of a definite
step which violates a clear
law with which the believer is familiar. In this instance, the Assembly
may
conclude that the believer has been warned repeatedly of the consequences
of
such behaviour through statements in widely circulated
Bahá'í
publications or in the deepening which a member of the community might
reasonably be expected to have received. Into this category would fall
the
offences against the Bahá'í requirement of parental consent
to
marriage, and the violations of law about which general warnings have been
given in your newsletter.
"Circumstances may arise where the offence is so
serious that immediate action
is required by the National Assembly to protect the Faith. In this
connection,
it is stated in a letter written on behalf of the Guardian:
'You should vigilantly watch over and
protect the interests of the
Bahá'í Community, and the moment you see that any of the . .
.
Bahá'ís . . . are acting in a way to bring disgrace upon the
name
of the Faith, warn them, and, if necessary, deprive them immediately of
their
voting rights if they refuse to change their ways. Only in this way can
the
purity of the Faith be preserved. Compromise and weak measures will
obscure
the vision of its followers, sap its strength, lower it in the eyes of the
public and prevent it from making any progress.'
"The Universal House of Justice has stated that, in matters concerning the
deprivation of voting rights, an Assembly should bear in mind that, at the
present time, when Bahá'í laws are being progressively
applied
and a sizeable proportion of a community consists of newly declared
believers,
an Assembly may accept ignorance of the Bahá'í law as a
valid
excuse when it is convinced that such ignorance existed; great wisdom is
required in the application of this provision, since it is not unknown for
a
believer guilty of flagrant misconduct to attempt to escape the
administrative
consequence of his behaviour through a fervent but spurious claim of
ignorance
of the law.
Factors to Consider Before Applying Sanctions
"In deciding whether or not to remove
voting rights, every
case should be considered on its merits and in light of the particular
circumstances. The purpose of the administrative sanction should be borne
clearly in mind in deciding how much weight to give to factors such as the
passage of time, the extent to which the individual concerned has
experienced
an adverse reaction in the Bahá'í community, the degree of
suffering and contrition exhibited by the believer whose status is being
questioned, his stature in the Bahá'í community or the wider
society, and media publicity of his delinquent behaviour. While there is
room
for compassion, this should not deflect you from giving due consideration
to
the responsibility you bear to protect the community and its good name,
and to
uphold the authority of Bahá'í law.
Whether to Notify the Community
"It is within the discretion of a
National Spiritual Assembly
to decide whether to notify the community when a believer has been
deprived of
his administrative rights; the Assembly is also free to decide how such a
notification is to be made, and whether or not the reasons for the
deprivation
are to be disclosed. Such decisions might be made with regard to the
purposes
which would be served by such an announcement, and the benefit to the
community
of this knowledge. If a believer advises you of an appeal to the
Universal
House of Justice against your decision to withdrawn his voting rights, he
remains without these rights while the merit of his appeal is being
assessed by
the House of Justice; it would generally be preferable not to make an
announcement to the community about his loss of voting rights while the
appeal
is being considered, but special circumstances, such as the imperative
need to
protect the Bahá'í community from his actions, could compel
you
to do otherwise.
Conditions for Restoration of Administrative Rights
"When a believer is deprived of his
administrative rights, he
is entitled to clear information on the requirements to be fulfilled in
order
that his rights may be restored; these may include the passage of a
prescribed
period of time, the performance of certain remedial actions, or the
alteration
of an attitude or pattern of behaviour which is considered unworthy or
harmful.
A condition for the restoration of voting rights is that the believer be
repentant, as evidenced by his statement to that effect or by his
demeanour and
conduct. A believer should not feel compelled to admit his past errors in
order to be regarded as repentant; you can infer repentance from his
behaviour,
his manifest spirit of cooperation with the Assembly, and his evident
desire to
scrupulously adhere to the teachings. Should he display a rebellious or
resentful attitude, or be contemptuous of Bahá'í law and the
consequence of violation of his provision, you would be justified in
denying
him the right to re-enter the Bahá'í community.
Foundation of Future World Civilization
"The Universal House of Justice is
fully cognizant of the
difficulties encountered by National Spiritual Assemblies in administering
Bahá'í law at this period in history when the world is
afflicted
with lawlessness, moral decadence, and confusion. The institutions of the
Cause are called upon to guide and regulate the conduct of the believers
so
that the Bahá'í community may offer, to both seeker and
sceptic,
a compelling proof of the transforming power of the Revelation of
Bahá'u'lláh. By this means will humankind be led to accept
the
truth of His claim, and will thereby be enabled to find that unity and
harmony
for which it is so desperately yearning. Upon this foundation will be
constructed the future world civilization which humanity is destined to
attain."