top of page

Five Jehovah’s Witnesses Sentenced to Two Years in Jail in Algeria for Sharing Their Faith

Their teachings are accused of “endangering the unity of the nation.” It is a clear violation of international principles on freedom of religion or belief.


January 27, 2025


The Justice Court of Tirzi Ouzou. Credits.
The Justice Court of Tirzi Ouzou. Credits.

On December 2, 2024, the Tirzi Ouzou Court in Algeria has sentenced five Jehovah’s Witnesses to two years of imprisonment plus a fine of 100,000 Algerian dinars “for the offense of inciting a Muslim to change religion and the offense of undermining national unity.”


That the defendants spoke about religion with Muslims is probably true, although there is no direct evidence of that in the judgment, no evidence of conversion, and no witness who affirms it. The problem is that in Algeria, while speaking about religion is allowed, especially for Muslims, inciting people to change their religion is not allowed by the law. What makes a difference between speaking about religion and inciting to change one’s religion? The distinction is so tight that it becomes easy for judges to arbitrarily switch from one to the other, to the detriment of innocent people, especially Christians. Some authorities may easily confuse both based on the corresponding Algerian statute of 2006. This Statute is also in violation of international principles of freedom of religion and belief, which include the right to proselyte and teach others about one’s religion.


The idea that teaching a religion other than Islam may “undermine the national unity” of Algeria also derives from law 06-09 of 2006, which is both liberticide and inconsistent with international human rights principles. However, the Tirzi Ouzou decision is also based on a reconstruction of some teachings of the Jehovah’s Witnesses that is grossly inaccurate.


The decision claims that the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that “Satan is the ruler of the current world system… The Bible says: ‘The whole world is under the control of the evil one.’ They believe that other religions, including Islam, teach their followers erroneous beliefs and lead them to disobey God. For this reason, they are committed to warning people not to follow the governments or accept them… What this sect advocates is allegedly in contradiction with public order and the foundations and principles of the Algerian state. The dissemination of such beliefs in Algeria could harm the stability of the state and create a rift between the people and its constitutional institutions, as this sect is based on the principle that all governments are illegitimate. The fact that the accused disseminated these ideas and tried to attract as many citizens as possible constitutes a threat to the stability of the state.”


Although some expressions are quoted from publications of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and from the Bible itself, their interpretation is tendentious and malicious.


Obviously, all Christians believe in the existence of Satan. This is not a specific teaching of the Jehovah’s Witnesses but of Christianity in general (as well as Judaism and Islam). That “We know… that the whole world is under the control of the Evil One,” i.e., of Satan (all quotes from the New International Version of the Bible) is not a peculiar theory of the Jehovah’s Witnesses but comes from the New Testament, First Letter of John 5:19.


Satan as the prince of this world. Orthodox monastery of Sv. Joakim Osogovski, North Macedonia.
Satan as the prince of this world. Orthodox monastery of Sv. Joakim Osogovski, North Macedonia.

This is a teaching of all Christian churches. However, it can be easily misunderstood. It is a common mistake to read single verses of the Bible without referring to the whole context. “World” in the New Testament and in the words of Jesus himself has two different meanings. It has a neutral meaning, simply indicating our Planet and its historical circumstances. For instance, Jesus says in the Gospel of John 12:47 “I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.” This is obviously a neutral and not negative meaning of “world”: Jesus does not judge it and wants to save it. Yet, we read in the same New Testament, in Romans 12:2 “Do not conform to the patterns of this world.” And in the Gospel of John 17:9, Jesus says: “My prayer is not for the world.” This is clearly a second meaning of “world.” Christian theologians have clarified that there is a “neutral” world, the space where humans history happens and a space Jesus wants to “save,” and an “evil” “world” where “worldly” is opposed to “spiritual,” a “world” that is opposed to transcendence, for which Jesus refuses to pray, and which is indeed “under the control of Satan.” Jehovah’s Witnesses simply quote Biblical passages that are common among Christians and have been repeated by Christian churches for millennia. Jehovah’s Witnesses are no different from other religious groups, including Islam, in believing that humankind is under the influence of Satan, and that those who submit to Satan, apart from God, form that “world” every believer should separate from. 


Obviously, like all religious organizations, Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that theirs is the true path tho salvation. I have studied religions for fifty years and never met a religion that claims that “perhaps ours is the true religion and perhaps it is not.” Islam also believes that it is the last and perfected religion, which God has sent down to the earth (Sura Al Ma’ida 5). Obviously, if one becomes a Jehovah’s Witness, s/he believes that the teachings of the Jehovah’s Witnesses are true and that the best act of charity s/he can perform toward others is to share these true teachings with them. Again, this is not a unique feature of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is typical of all religions, with very few exceptions. As mentioned earlier, international statements about freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) clearly specify that the right to proselyte and tell others about one’s own religion is part of FoRB. It is equally obvious that arguing that one’s religion is true implies arguing that other religions, while they may include honest and very good people and elements of truth, are not fully true. If they are not fully true, they also include falsehoods, as the Bible states about the “religions of the nations” (see e.g., Psalms 96:5). Today, in my decade-long experience of studying them, Jehovah’s Witnesses interact respectfully with people of all religions. However, as most other religionists, they are persuaded that their own religious organization offers the genuine path to salvation devised by God. If believing this is a crime, then it is a crime committed by most if not all religions.


Jehovah’s Witnesses sharing their faith. Source: JW.org.
Jehovah’s Witnesses sharing their faith. Source: JW.org.

The biblical quote “the whole world is under the control of the Evil One” has generated entire libraries of theological treatises about “the demonic face of political power.” Great Christian theologians such as Augustine of Hippo wrote memorable pages about it. This was interpreted as the fact that when the political power does not accept that a higher morality exists above it, it becomes tyrannical and unjust and reveals a “demonic” face. In the history of Christianity there has always been a prophetic tradition that affirms this doctrine by asking devotees to stay away from politics. The Quakers and branches of the Mennonites have practiced this abstention from politics for centuries. Just as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, they are known as law-abiding citizens. The Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that, even if the political powers are not part of the Kingdom of God, so that their members do not participate in politics by voting or running for office, nonetheless it is their duty to support the secular governments and strictly respect their laws.


This is clearly expressed in a key text of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the book “The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life”: “[Questions] What should a Christian’s attitude toward political governments be? (b) Why should a Christian not join in riots or in civil disobedience to interfere with government activity? [Answer] Commenting on the attitude that a Christian should have toward the political governments, the apostle Paul said: ‘Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God.’ (Romans 13:1) This does not mean that God established these governments or that he approves of their course. Some of them plainly say that they are atheistic. Nonetheless, God permits them to exist. They would not be able to exercise authority at all if God did not allow it. (John 19:11) And if God permits them to rule, why should any Christian interfere with their doing so? Even if a person disagrees with what the government is doing, why should he join in a riot or share in civil disobedience to try to prevent the State from carrying on its business? Anyone doing so will get himself into trouble, not only with the secular government, but also with God. As Romans 13:2 says: ‘Therefore he who opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will receive judgment to themselves.” 


As we see, the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that those who do not obey the governments, even if through “civil disobedience,” “will get himself into trouble, not only with the secular government, but also with God.” From a theological point of view, God may not have “established,” only “permitted” certain governments. Nonetheless, the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that God wants them to obey the governments: “he who opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God.” Applying that both in words and deeds, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not incite people to disobey to the governmental authorities, to vote against the existing government, or to fight it. In that sense, they remain politically neutral.


The Algerian decision mentions that there is a specific point on which the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not obey secular laws. When these impose military service, they refuse to serve and ask for their right to conscientious objection. Among Christians, they are not the only ones. In an official publication of 2012, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights summarized the prevailing interpretation of international law as follows: “Conscientious objection to military service is based on the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The right to conscientious objection to military service… is normally characterized as a derivative right; a right that is derived from an interpretation of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” (page 7). Note that as law-abiding citizens, the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not refuse to serve their countries. They accept non-military forms of alternative civil service, provided they are not managed nor supervised by military authorities. Most countries of the world accept this attitude of the Jehovah’s Witnesses without problems. It is in a way also to their advantage, as they can be certain that no Jehovah’s Witness will ever take part in a military conflict against them. 


The interpretation of some beliefs of the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Algerian decision is inaccurate. It is based on the common fallacy to regard as specific to the Jehovah’s Witnesses beliefs that are common to all Christians and to read literally some of their publications, without examining what behavior derives in practice from certain statements. It is also based on the confusion that Jehovah’s Witnesses practice their beliefs irrespective of the legal context which they live in. True, Jehovah’s Witnesses preach and teach the Bible, meet in small gatherings and large assemblies in all democratic countries around the world. However, when living in countries where freedom of religion is restricted, such as in Muslim countries, they show a reasonable spirit by adapting the extent of their practices. They might accept to discuss about religion, especially when people ask them questions, as it is allowed by the law. But they do not incite or constrain Muslims to change their religion. One cannot be criminalized for other’s free individual choices. 


Those who know the Jehovah’s Witnesses have always found that they are good citizens, respectful of the laws, teaching to their families and co-religionists high moral standards. Putting them in jail for teaching their peaceful and law-abiding religion is a scandal the international community should not tolerate.



Comments


bottom of page