Alexander Verkhovsky: "It would be better for the state not to embark on this slippery slope"

"The books of the Bible are written in different languages. There are a lot of options: canonical, non-canonical. The question of the canonicity of the text, most likely, should not, after all, be considered by a secular court.

But in any case, without going into casuistry, we already know that there are many translations of the Bible. These translations are different and will be different, just as the translations of any book are always different. Therefore, to say that it is in these differences ... I just can't imagine what the prosecutor will prove in court. That he will find any differences between the translation adopted by Jehovah's Witnesses and the translation of the Synodal and will prove that these differences are extremist? That would be the only logical way, so to speak, but I'm afraid you can't prove anything that way. Although we know how these processes are going on in our country. Often very rapidly, I would say.

Therefore, unfortunately, it cannot be ruled out that the prosecutor's office will also benefit here. But, in general, this is still a very big scandal, so maybe someone, after all, will give up and this will not happen. If, however, the prosecutor's office wins, then there will, of course, be problems for Jehovah's Witnesses. But, problems can arise in other people too. And not because they accidentally got the Bible in the wrong translation. They may not have even noticed. After all, not everyone understands it that way. But simply because it opens up prospects for the most unexpected bans further. This, in general, depends on the imagination, to a large extent. Therefore, it would be better, of course, for the state not to embark on this slippery slope, because it is completely incomprehensible where it will lead.

Alexander Verkhovsky, Director of the SOVA Information and Analytical Center, member of the Presidential Council for Human Rights.