The Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses in Spain is Suing a Little Flock of Its Victims

Eric Wilson

There is a David vs. Goliath fight going on right now in the law courts of Spain. On the one hand, there are  a small number of individuals who consider themselves to be victims of religious persecution. These comprise the “David” in our scenario.  The mighty Goliath is a multi-billion-dollar corporation in the guise of a Christian religion. This religious corporation has persecuted these Christians over the years who now cry out as victims.

There is nothing wrong with this outcry. In fact, it was prophesied to occur.

“When he opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those slaughtered because of the word of God and because of the witness they had given. They shouted with a loud voice, saying: “Until when, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, are you refraining from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” And a white robe was given to each of them, and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled of their fellow slaves and their brothers who were about to be killed as they had been.” (Revelation 6:9-11 NWT)

In this instance, the killing isn’t literal, though on occasion it does end up that way, because the persecution is so emotionally intense that some have sought escape by taking their own life.

But the religious corporation in question has no empathy or love for such ones. It does not consider them to have been victimized, just as Jesus predicted would be the case.

“Men will expel you from the synagogue. In fact, the hour is coming when everyone who kills you will think he has offered a sacred service to God. But they will do these things because they have not come to know either the Father or me.”  (John 16:2, 3 NWT)

Surely it is because this religious corporation believes it is doing God’s will that it has the temerity, having already persecuted and victimized these disciples of Christ once, to do so yet again using the law courts of the land.

The “David” in this fight is the Asociación Española de víctimas de los testigos de Jehová (In English: The Spanish Association of Victims of Jehovah’s Witnesses). Here’s a link to their web site:  https://victimasdetestigosdejehova.org/

The “Goliath”, if you haven’t already guessed, is the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses, represented through its branch office in Spain.

The first of four lawsuits brought by the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses against the Association of Victimes of Jehovah’s Witnesses has just been concluded. I had the honor of interviewing the attorney representing the Association of Victims, our David.

I’ll start by asking him his name and to please give us a little background.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

My name is Carlos Bardavio Anton. I have been a lawyer for 16 years. I am also a professor of criminal law at two universities. I did my doctoral thesis on religious sects in Criminal Law and I published it in 2018 under the title: “Las sectas en Derecho Penal, estudio dogmático del tipo sectario” (In English: Sects in Criminal Law, a study of dogmatic sectarianism).

So, within my field of criminal law, a large part of my work pertains to helping those who feel they are victims of coercive groups or religious sects and seek to publicly denounce their practices. In 2019, I became aware of the Spanish Association of Victims of Jehovah’s Witnesses. This Association was presented to the public through the Spanish-American Association of Psychological Abuse Research, in which I also participated. Specifically, we explored the topic of legal strategies relating to combatting and suing mind-controlling sects. This also includes the crimes of psychological manipulation and coercive persuasion. Because of my connection with the Spanish Association of Victims of Jehovah’s Witnesses, I was well suited to become the Association’s legal counsel when the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses mounted a law suit against them.

About a year and a half ago, the Association of Victims called to inform me that a lawsuit had been filed by the religious denomination of Jehovah's Witnesses in Spain seeking monetary remuneration for defamation.

In short, this lawsuit demanded the removal of the word “victims” from the name of the Association of Victims, and also the removal of the word “victims” from the web page and its statutes. Statements such as “the Jehovah's Witnesses are a destructive sect that can ruin your life, your health, even ruin your family, your social environment, etcetera, etcetera” were to be removed. So, what we have done in response is to defend the Association and its victims by providing the real truth about the victimization of 70 individuals by means of submitting their written testimonies in record time, in just 20 days. And in addition to those 70 testimonies, 11 or 12 people testified in court. The trial has now just ended. There were five very long sessions. It was very hard work, very hard.  Eleven witnesses representing Jehovah's Witnesses also testified claiming essentially that everything was “marvelous and perfect” within their organization.

Eric Wilson

The witnesses testimony that everything was “marvelous and perfect” doesn’t surprise me because of my years serving within the Witness community. Can you tell us what was the effect of the sworn testimony from the victims?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

When it came time for the victims to give their testimony, the stories they told of how they were victimized were atrocious; so atrocious that many people in the courtroom were moved to tears by the accounts that were presented. It took three full sessions for the court to hear the entirety of the testimony from those eleven victims.

The trial ended on January 30, 2023 and we are awaiting the ruling of the court. It is important to note that we had the support of the Prosecution Ministry of Spain which represents both the law and the state and always intervenes in proceedings where there is an alleged violation of a fundamental right, whether criminal, or as in this case, civil. Therefore, the legal support of the Prosecution Ministry as the representative of the State was very important.

Eric Wilson

To clarify for our English speakers, Wikipedia states that “The Prosecution Ministry (Spanish: Ministerio Fiscal) is a constitutional body…integrated into the Judiciary of Spain, but with full autonomy. It is entrusted with defending the rule of law, the rights of the citizens, and public interest, as well as watching over the independence of the courts of justice.”

Carlos, did the Prosecution Ministry support the cause of the defendants, the victims?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Yes, it did. It provided legal support to the Spanish Association of Victims of Jehovah's Witnesses. What the Prosecution Ministry stated, in brief summation, is that all the information supplied by the Association of Victims falls under, first, freedom of speech, which is very important as a fundamental right. Second, that this freedom of speech has been expressed in an appropriate way, that is to say, that one can express one's opinion always with a certain, let's say, politeness, without using offensive words that are not necessary, and if there are some offensive words, that they be appropriate to the context. Of course, if the victims say that there are certain, let's say, certain manipulations, certain issues that affect their psychological health, etcetera, etcetera, one cannot say otherwise, as long as the Association does not say something that goes beyond the context of what the victim is saying. And of great importance, the Prosecution Ministry as a representative of the State said that in addition to the right of freedom of speech, the Association has a right to exercise freedom of information. That means the right to warn society in general through critical analysis in support of the victims. The Association of Victims has the right to provide information to the people of Spain, and indeed, to the people of the world. The Prosecution Ministry made this very clear by declaring: “There is a public interest and a general interest in society to know what is happening within the Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses...”

So much is this the case that the public prosecutor said in open court that because of the many media sources available, there is a general interest in this information. So, the rights of the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses to preserve its “good name” cannot take precedence over the right to freedom of speech and freedom of information.

Eric Wilson

So, has the case been decided or is it still awaiting trial?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

We are awaiting a ruling. These procedures are affected by the inclusion of the Prosecution Ministry (Ministerio Fiscal) which has full autonomy and thus does not answer to either the plaintiff or the defendant.  It’s participation in the proceedings is an important, yet independent element. In the end, the judge takes everything into consideration before rendering her ruling which is anticipated to be made public by the end of April or the beginning of May of this year.

Eric Wilson

Carlos, I’m sure this is taxing the patience of the defendants, the victims, in this case.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Very much so.  These people who feel they have been victimized represent not only victims in Spain, but others in other countries.  We know this through communications on social media. All are anxiously waiting for this sentence because they consider that this lawsuit is yet another attack upon them. There are so many victims, so many people feel victimized. They consider that this lawsuit launched by the Organization is really attacking their honor and reputation, as if they have no right to consider themselves a victim.

Eric Wilson

I’m going to pause the interview here for a moment to reason with those of you who are watching and who may be feeling conflicted because you have been told through the publications of the Watch Tower Corporation and by the members of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, that disfellowshipping is a Bible requirement. The only rule that Jesus gave us—remember Jesus, the only one who has the right under God to make the rules?—well, the only rule he gave us about disfellowshipping is round at Matthew 18:15-17. If an unrepentant sinner does not want to stop sinning, he is to be for us like a man of the nations—that is, a non-Jew—or a tax collector. Okay, but Jesus talked with men of the nations. He ever performed miracles for them as when he healed the servant of a roman soldier.  And as for tax collectors, the one recording Jesus words about disfellowshipping was Matthew, the tax collector. And how did he become a disciple? Wasn’t it because while he was still a tax collector, Jesus spoke with him? So this idea of Witnesses that you have to not say so much as a hello to a disfellowshipped person is bogus.

But let’s go deeper. Let’s go into the worst part of the sin of shunning practiced by Jehovah’s Witnesses: Shunning someone simply because they have resigned as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. I remember when I was an elder and a Catholic, for instance, wanted to be baptized. I was instructed to tell them to write a letter of resignation and had it into their priest. They had to resign from the church before being baptized as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Now what happened to them? Did the priest read an announcement in the church so that all the Catholics in the town would know that they were no longer allowed to even say hello to the person? Would the 1.3 billions catholics in the world know that they must not even say hello to that person because he had resigned from the church. Would they risk being excommunicated for disobeying this rule as is the case with Jehovah’s Witnesses who violate the law of shunning a disassociated person?

So you can imagine my shock when I first learned that the Organization has such a thin skin that they would feel the need to spend time and money to attack people they are currently shunning because those people dare to disagree with the policy and call it out for what it is, an unscriptural punishment invented by men not God as a means to control the flock?

When a man abuses his wife, and then learns that she has denounced him publicly, what does he often do? I mean, if he is a typical wife beater and bully? Does he leave her alone? Does he acknowledge that she is right and he has sinned against her? Or does he threaten her to try to get her to submit and remain silent? That would be the cowardly way of acting, wouldn’t it? Something that is typical of a bully.

That the Organization I was once so proud of could act like a cowardly bully shocked me.  How far they have fallen. They like to think they are the only Christians being persecuted, but they have become just like the churches they have long criticized for their persecution of true Christians. They have become the persecutors.

I wasn’t sure if this perception might also be shared by those who have never been Jehovah’s Witnesses, so I asked Carlos about that. This was what he had to say:

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

The first thing I noticed upon hearing of the lawsuit was that the religious denomination (Jehovah’s Witnesses) did not think things through. They did not adequately plan for the potential of our strategy which was to defend ourselves with the truth, specifically, the very believable firsthand accounts of the victims themselves.

But it doesn’t stop with this first case. On the 13^th of February, another case began. The plaintiff, the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses, has not only sued the Association, but also the individuals making up its Board of Directors. It has launched three additional lawsuits, one against the Administrator, a second against the assistant administrator and finally one against a director who is simply a delegate. In this second of four lawsuits, the strategy of the Organization has been more clearly exposed. The idea that was relayed to the judge by the plaintiff is precisely what you have stated: That they believe the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses is being unjustly persecuted by these victims when they publicize their accounts.

Now, I, at one point, asked one of Jehovah's Witnesses if he had noticed from the testimony of some Witness Elders on Monday the 13th and yesterday the 15^th, that when questions about whether they had called on or been interested in any of the alleged victims.

None of them had called on any of the 70 alleged victims, nor did any of them know if anyone else had called on those victims to offer support.

Eric Wilson

Again, this sad situation is no surprise to me.  Witnesses like to talk about how they exemplify Christian love, but the love the Organization and its members practices is very conditional. It has nothing to do with the love Jesus said would identify his disciples to people on the outside.

“I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are my disciples—if you have love among yourselves.” (John 13:34, 35)

I really can’t imagine any Christian feeling victimized by Jesus, nor having to fight off a lawsuit against him.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Quite so. My understanding is that they make no attempt to contact these people who feel victimized.  Instead, their response is to sue the Association that has organized the victims, given them a platform to speak from, and has provided them with support and comfort.

They have been adversely affected psychologically. Of course, they speak out to some degree because of the suffering they have endured due to the ostracism or shunning policies of the Organization. But now to add to that, they are being branded as liars. The pain this causes makes it natural for them to want to win out against their accusers, and so they are anxious to get the ruling of the Court.

I have repeatedly told them that judicial suits do not end with the first judges ruling. There is always the possibility of an appeal. It may even go to the Spanish Constitutional Court, which is similar to the American Supreme Court or the Supreme Court of Canada, for example, and then there would even be one more instance, which is the European Court of Human Rights. Therefore, the battle can be very long.

Eric Wilson

Exactly. A prolonged case will only expose these legal machinations to the public more and more. Given that, do you feel that this has turned out to be a very poorly thought-out legal strategy on the part of Jehovah’s Witnesses? Would it not have been better for them to have done nothing?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

I think so, I think so. From what the people who feel they are victims tell me, this has been a painful process for them, but the way through it for the 70 people involved it to just tell the truth, their truth. Therefore, I believe that if the media here in Spain, and in other parts of the world, have echoed and exposed what is happening in Spain and indeed all over the world, it will have caught the Organization off guard.  We have appeared on television, for example, on Televisión Española, which is the national public channel, we have appeared on other private channels. And what has caught the attention of journalists and others is the hypocrisy of a religion that is supposed to be empathetic and supportive of those who feel victimized, whether they are more or less right, obviously, but that instead has chosen to sue these people. This only makes the problem worse, further separating family members from one another. Even more, it creates a confrontation between family members, with the testimonies of Jehovah's Witnesses against those of relatives who are no longer witnesses, but victims instead.

This creates a major rift that is doing a lot of damage.

Eric Wilson

I'm sure it has. In my faith, this means there is one more thing to answer for before God.

But I have a question regarding the judicial system in Spain.  Are court trial transcripts made public? Can we learn exactly what was said by all parties?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

And here in Spain, trials are recorded, the five trial sessions of this case were all recorded, usually with good quality. But it is also true that I have seen some sessions, which, because of the cell phones that are in the courtroom, sometimes there is interference, beeps, that sometimes it is annoying to listen to the trial. So, the question you are asking is a very interesting question, because it is not very clear in Spain if it is possible. The trials are public, that is, anyone who wants to enter the trial can enter. In this case, the courtroom was very small and only five people could enter for each part of the case, for each part of the procedure. Then there is a problem of privacy, even though these are public trials, there are intimate details revealed concerning the experiences of the people who testify. Some of these are very delicate and intimate details. There is a debate going on in Spain because of a law, the Personal Data Protection Law. I really do not know whether all the information revealed in this trial can be released to the public. Personally, I doubt it because of the right to protect the privacy of all parities.

Eric Wilson

I understand. We would not want to add to the pain of the victims by releasing intimate and painful details to the public.  What interests me personally and what would serve the public at large would be to release the testimony of those defending the position of the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. They believe they are defending the good news and upholding the sovereignty of Jehovah God. Given that, they believe they are guided by and protected by holy spirit.  Matthew 10:18-20 tells true Christians that when going before a judge or a government official, we do not need to worry about what we will say, because the words will be given to us in that instant, for holy spirit will speak through us.

The truth of the matter is that in recent years in court case after court case that has not happened. The world saw that firsthand when Jehovah’s Witness elders and even a Governing Body member were put under oath by the Royal Commission of Australia some years ago and were shown to be totally confounded by the questions put to them.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

But I am going to give you my opinion first on the sessions, the five hearings. There were journalists, even some television producers, as far as I understand, not only from the print media, but also from television, I believe, both national and international. Of course, it is up to them to get the information however they can and to broadcast it as they wish. But it is also true that there was an audience in the room that will be able to tell what they see fit to reveal. My feeling about what you say about the biblical passage in Matthew is that the Organization’s witnesses were very well prepared in their answering the questions put to them by their own lawyers. However, when it came my turn to question them, they were very reticent to answer, claiming often that they couldn’t recall things. They kept asking me to repeat the question put to them. They didn’t seem to understand anything about which I was asking them. It was evident that the answers they were giving to their own lawyers had been well rehearsed. Their answers were straightforward and given without hesitation, and all well rehearsed. That really caught my attention. Very much so. Of course, for these reasons, after they had given this complete testimony on behalf of the plaintiff (Jehovah’s Witnesses), it was very challenging for me to bring out the inconsistencies and contradictions in their statements, but I believe I was able to do so effectively.

And I believe that fortunately, whatever happens, the ruling is likely to include a large part of those statements of the Jehovah's Witnesses members. Therefore, if the court transcript is not published because of the issue of protecting privacy and personal information, since the ruling of the court is public, it is likely that large parts of the transcript are made public, and this would include much of the testimony given by Jehovah’s Witnesses on behalf of their Organization.

Eric Wilson

Okay, that's it. So, we will get some benefit out of this, beyond the eventual ruling of the judge.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Notice that, for example, a retired spokesman for Jehovah's Witnesses in Spain who acted on behalf of the Organization for almost 40 years until 2021 testified for three hours. He said many things that, according to my clients, seemed to contradict what is generally preached and accepted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. Likewise, the elders, publishers, etcetera, who testified for anywhere between an hour and a half to two hours each, stated things that—to my knowledge as well as to that of the Association of Victims—contradicted certain biblical teachings and current policies of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Eric Wilson

Some years ago in Canada, we saw a lawyer for Jehovah’s Witnesses whom I know personally, David Gnam, argue before the Supreme Court that the JW policy of shunning disfellowshipped and disassociated members was only on a spiritual level. He claimed that it didn't touch family relationships or anything like that. And all of us, all of us who are in the know, all of us who are or were Jehovah's Witnesses, knew immediately that this lawyer was speaking a baldfaced lie to the highest court in the land. You see, we know and have lived the practice of this policy.  We know that anyone violating the shunning policy and ignoring the rule to shun someone who the elders of the congregation have denounced from the platform will themselves be threatened with shunning, that is disfellowshipping.

Carlos then told us that he asked about disfellowshipping by referring to the Shepherd the Flock of God book published by the Watch Tower Society, specifically the subsection titled “When to form a judicial committee?” Using this book which had been entered into evidence, he put it to both publishers as well as elders who were on the stand what they believed disfellowshipping and shunning involved. Here is the surprising answer he got:

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Surprisingly, what both elders and publishers testified was that the decision to treat someone as a disfellowshipped individual was personal. They claimed that the elders do not disfellowship, but that each one makes that determination on their own.

I asked each one the same question: “Then why is it called disfellowshipping?”  There was no answer to this, which is shocking, because everybody understands what disfellowshipping represents. I don't know how to say it in English, but in Spanish “expulsion” means that you want to stay in a place and they throw you out. Of course, the reason for their being disfellowshipped is often clear. But now the accusers are trying to change the meaning of the term. They claim that members are not expelled.  Instead, they disfellowship themselves because they choose to sin. But this is simply untrue.  Those who come before a judicial committee do not want to be expelled because those who want to leave, simply disassociate. This is something everyone knows, even those of us with only superficial knowledge of Witness life. Therefore, this strategy of testimony really stands out and attention must be paid to it.

Eric Wilson

The fact is that within the Witness community, there is no fundamental difference between disassociation and disfellowshipping.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

I'm not going to contradict you because many of the alleged victims have told me that they had no choice but to disassociate. It was the only way for them to break free. However, they never imagined how very traumatic this would be. Though they knew there was a possibility that their family bonds would be broken, they didn’t think it would really happen, and were unprepared for the pain it would cause them.

Eric Wilson

You have to experience the pain and trauma of being shunned by your entire social network including your closest family members, even children shunning parents or parents throwing children out of the house, to understand how very horrible and unchristian it is.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

No one is arguing that it is wrong to expel someone. For example, this question recently came before the authorities in Belgium.  The issue isn’t the right to expel, but rather whether it is right to shun. For example, if I have a tavern and expel someone because he does not comply with the rules of the establishment, then okay.  The problem is how the expulsion is done and under what conditions the expulsion is done. This is something that has not been debated in court, at least as far as I know, in a clear way, as it is happening now in Spain.

Eric Wilson

I couldn’t agree more. These are issues that have to be brought into the light so that the public can understand what is really going on inside the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses.  Jesus said, “For there is nothing hidden except for the purpose of being exposed; nothing has become carefully concealed but for the purpose of coming into the open.” (Mark 4:22) This will finally provide relief for thousands.  You see, there are many, many Jehovah’s Witnesses who no longer believe, but who continue to hide their true feelings for fear of losing out on important family relationships.  We call them in English, PIMO, Physically In, Mentally Out.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

I know I know. For example, in yesterday's trial in the second session the first one alleged victim on our side, after about a hour testifying, said something very logical, very sensible. He said something that I think everybody can agree with. He testified that Jehovah's Witnesses preach religious freedom; that they should be allowed religious freedom; that they should not be persecuted—and that is fantastic, of course, in any civilized country, in any civilized world—then he added that for that reason, he could not understand why, when he exercised his religious freedom to leave the Witnesses, all his family and friends in various congregations, some 400 people, were obliged to disrespect his decision by shunning him to the point of not even being willing to speak to him.

The explanation was given in a very simple and straightforward way.  It was clear that the judge in the case understood this as the key point.

Eric Wilson

Is it correct to say that the organization has launched seven lawsuits?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

No, there are only four. They are one against the Spanish Association of Victims. Another one against the President personally. Another one against the secretary personally and another one against the administrator of the social networks, who is Gabriel, which is the trial they are doing right now on the 13th and yesterday. So, they are, one against the association and three personally against these three people. So, we are right now in the second proceeding. In March we have the third proceeding, which will mark the third trial scheduled for March 9 and 10, that one will be against the secretary of the Association. As for the lawsuit against the president of the Association of Victims, at the moment we do not have a trial date.

Eric Wilson

So this is not a single lawsuit, but four independent but related lawsuits?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Correct, and this is striking because there are many complaints concerning what the association says, or what the president says, or what the secretary says, which creates confusion as to whether it is a person or the association that is speaking. This makes for so much confusion that we have been able to take advantage of it in mounting our defense, because in the end, it becomes difficult to know who is accountable for what was said, the president, or the Association. For me, it is the Association, as a legal person that makes the statement. As part of my defense, I showed that this tactic of splitting the lawsuit into four amounted to suing multiple persons for the same alleged offenses.  Realizing that this tactic of theirs had misfired, they petitioned the court to have the four cases combined into one, but the judges, recognizing this tactic for what it was, said: No. No way. We won’t allow you to pull that. You chose this method thinking it would benefit you, and now you have to carry it through.

Eric Wilson

So, there are four different judges.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Actually no, there are four cases, but three different judges, with one judge presiding over two cases. The judge who is in charge of the trial of the association, the one that has just ended, is also the same judge of the trial we are doing this week, which is that of Gabriel Pedrero, who is the administrator of the association. It is a benefit that the same judge hears the first two cases, because that gives her greater knowledge going in thanks to what has been revealed in the five previous sessions of the first case. But it is also true that it is a very tiring case, that is, for one judge to carry the trial of the association and the trial of Gabriel, which is the same thing. Even more witnesses testified in this trail than in that of the association. For the Association’s trail, there were 11 on each side giving their testimony during five sessions, For this second trial, there are four sessions, but 15 witnesses testifying for each side. The downside of that is that it can be very tiring for the judges to listen to the same thing again.

But on the other hand, the judge already has prior knowledge of what happened in the trial of the association, which is very positive, and the representatives from the Prosecution Ministry are also the same. So, the prosecutor who supported us in the first trial against the association is also present in this other trial, which is very positive for us because she supported us before.

Eric Wilson

And when the four trials are over?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Well, the judge commented that both the ruling for Association trial and that of Gabriel will come out at the end of April or first of May. But it can take longer than anticipated. But more or less, she gave us to understand that around those dates the trial against Enrique Carmona, who is the secretary of the association, which starts on March 8th and 9^th, is comprised of only two sessions. I estimated that the ruling on that trial will be issued in June or July. The last proceeding, which is against the president of the association, should have been the first given the natural order of things. What happened?  The judge assigned to that case, upon learning that there were multiple lawsuits that were essentially the same, ruled that she would wait for the other suits to be concluded, and would only hold hers if there was information to present that was manifestly different from what has already been presented. If it was the same, then there was no reason to hold more sessions.

Eric Wilson

I see. Well, that makes sense.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Therefore, for this last lawsuit, the one targeting the president of the association of victims, there is as yet no date set, and I don’t think there will be one until we have rulings on the first three.

Eric Wilson

And they are seeking not only to eliminate the name and existence of the association, but they are also looking for money.

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Yes, and this a remarkable aspect of the lawsuit. It really surprised me.  The normal goal when someone files a defamation lawsuit of this type is to have the libels statements removed and that there be some financial compensation for the harm done. But in this instance, in all the lawsuits, the plaintiff is not specifying how much they are seeking. They say that they are looking for financial compensation, but in the filings, they do not specify how much they are seeking. Okay, there’s that. Then, in the trail for the Association of Victims, after five sessions, on the very last day of the trial after a year and a half has gone by since the initial filing, during the closing remarks, my esteemed colleague, the plaintiff’s lawyer, said that they were going to ask for monetary damages. This, right out of the blue, he claimed that proper compensation would amount to, at a minimum, 350,000 euros, but that they could be justified in asking for millions of euros due to the enormous harm the Association had caused the religion. But, as a favor to the defendant, they were only going to ask for 25,000 euros, which is what they did, the asked for 25,000 euros which is about 30,000 US dollars. That’s nothing, nothing. A very small amount to ask for.

I replied to them with two responses. The first was that if they were short 25,000 euros, that I’d be happy to make them a gift of that sum of money. If that’s all they needed, I’d be happy to had that over to them, no problem. Of course, I said that sardonically because it seemed so odd for them to ask that amount.

Second, that they should wait until the final day at the very end of the trail to ask for this money without providing any verifiable justification for the amount they were asking for seemed very odd. I told them: You’ve asked for 25,000 euros without telling us why you need that money as compensation, or what is the basis for asking for it. For instance, you haven’t specified how many Bibles you’ve failed to sell, or how many clients, or future members you’ve failed to recruit, or how many current members have left, or how much revenue you have failed to receive. You haven’t given me any proof, so I just have to pay you 25,000 euros because you say so? That’s why I told them, listen, if you are in need the funds, I’ll give them to you myself.

Eric Wilson

If you win, and I hope you do, I am very confident that you will win, because from what I see, reason and justice is on your side, but if you win, it is possible that the judge or judges would levy a fine against the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

No, only if it were a very frivolous claim, it is something very, very false, based on lies.  It would be very exceptional for the court to do that. That is very unlikely to happen in these cases. What can happen here is that if we win, everything stays as it is. The association can continue to call itself Society of Victims and continue to publish what it has been publishing. And we would win our costs, that is to say, the religious denomination would have to pay for my professional services. In Spain, my professional services are based in relation to the amount requested as compensation. Of course, if we win and if they had asked for 1 million euros, then I and the association would have earned much more money in costs. However, since they have asked for only 25,000 euros, a laughable amount to ask for, then the costs can only be set at about six or seven thousand euros, which is nothing. A pitiable amount to cover costs. But it is also true that the same thing could happen in the other three trials. Of course, assuming that we win.

Of course, if we lose, then the association would have to pay 25,000 euros which, thankfully, isn’t much.

In the end, after all the fuss that’s been made over this, after all that has transpired, in the end, it all comes down to removing the name “victims” and getting 25,000 euros.  That’s it?

Eric Wilson

When I first learned about this lawsuit launched against victims of shunning by the Witnesses, I thought that the Organization had lost its mind. The whole thing seems so petty, ridiculous, and spiteful.  It seemed to me that the Organization was shooting itself in the foot. They like to keep things in the dark and often refuse to speak with the media, yet here they are launching an attack on people who have been victimized. From the standpoint of the world, this is a no-win scenario.  They will just look like bullies, win or lose. Even if we take the view that Witnesses are the purest of Christians—a view I do not hold, but even if I did—then why do they not act like Christians. This seems to be the inevitable outcome of a policy that has continued to put the Organization as a sort of golden calf.  Jehovah’s Witnesses now worship the Organization and hold it up as the means to salvation. The Organization claims to be the channel through which Jehovah God speaks to Christian today, so saying anything against the Organization is essentially blasphemy to them. By no longer viewing themselves as individuals—as individual Christians under one leader, Jesus Christ—Witnesses have adopted a group-think mentality. Thus, they can justify ignoring clearly stated commands from God in favor of Organizational directives. For instance, our Lord Jesus tells us to “return evil for evil to no one. Take into consideration what is fine from the viewpoint of all men. [That would include how the world sees these lawsuits] If possible, as far as it depends on you, be peaceable with all men. [Launching a lawsuit hardly qualifies as peaceable.] Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ says Jehovah.” [These lawsuits are clearly vengeful in nature.] But “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals on his head.” Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good.” (Romans 12:17-21) [They consider these victims as apostates, as enemies, but rather than follow this command from Jesus, they persecute them further.]

If Jehovah’s Witnesses were to have applied this counsel, they would not have people so embittered and so traumatized that they would feel it necessary to form an Association of Victims. Even if these victims are in the wrong, which they are not, but even if they were, a lawsuit of this kind shows that the leaders of the Organization do not believe that Jehovah will avenge, and so they must do so themselves.

And what moves them to do so. Pettiness. These men do not know what real persecution is. Faithful Christians, former Jehovah’s Witnesses who are now shunned for standing up for truth, these are the ones who know what it is to suffer for the Christ. But these men get their nose out of joint because those they have persecuted and are persecuting dare to warn others as they decry the injustices they have suffered? They are like the Pharisees, who also acted like children whose pride had been wounded. (Matthew 11:16-19)

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

I have also noticed from the sworn testimony given by the Jehovah’s Witnesses in court, that they express feelings of hurt in both trials we have held so far. They feel very, very slandered and hurt by what the Association of Victims has claimed. They feel persecuted in some way and that their reputation has been damaged. They give the impression that there is more hatred toward them since the Association was founded.

So I have the feeling that having launched this lawsuit, they have garnered even more attention in the media, because—I may be wrong, but it appears that—this is the first time something like this lawsuit has happened.  And, of course, there is great interest in all the media. So, by having initiated this action, they are experiencing some collateral damage because, by suing their victims, many Jehovah’s Witnesses are coming to know what the Association of Victims has been saying. My clients just told me that there are instructions to Jehovah’s Witnesses not to read or listen to negative news about the Organization in the media. So what happens now? With so many media outlets, the information inevitably finds it way into the hands of individual Jehovah’s Witnesses, in one way or another, and this indirectly causes the members of the Organization more harm. Actually, everyone is being harmed by this legal action.

Eric Wilson

Thank you for providing this information and these insights to our audience. In closing, do you have any thoughts you’d like to share?

Dr. Carlos Bardavío

Yes, the truth is that I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak because this case it is very important to me, both personally and professionally. I have been very motivated by the Association of Victims decision to hire me because I have been working on my doctrinal thesis on this type of situation and so I feel that I’m very prepared for this type of defence. I have felt a great solidarity with the victims having heard their accounts. One of them called me to tell me that they’d been considering suicide. I’ve heard about many psychological problems. I’ve heard from professionals so I don’t doubt the truthfulness, and I have to confess that representing this case has had a profound effect upon me, personally, not professionally.  It has affected me because I have seen a lot of pain, a lot of suffering and so I try to help them as much as possible, I try to do my bit, my job, but fundamentally it is the people who feel they are victims who have to take a step forward and come out into the light to tell their truth, their feelings, the PIMOs also of those who feel they are victims in some way, because the only way they can inform society of their feelings is by speaking out about them.

I am very happy because we managed in a very short time to gather 70 people who testified in writing or in person before a judge who for the first time in history, at least as far as I know, in Spain, is getting to know the reality of the victims, of the people who feel they are victims. So, thank you very much also to you for giving me the opportunity to reach an audience such as the English-speaking and also Latin and Spanish-speaking audience. Thank you very much.

Eric Wilson

Thank you, Carlos for being there for those who are being persecuted for the truth.  Perhaps some of these victims have lost their faith in God due to the abuse suffered under the organization. The Bible tells us that anyone who stumbles one of the little ones will suffer a very severe judgment. Jesus said that “whoever stumbles one of these little ones that believe, it would be finer for him if a millstone such as is turned by an ass were put around his neck and he were actually pitched into the sea.” (Mark 9:42)

However, others have remained faithful and it is there stand for truth that has brought about this persecution. I am sure that while there are 70 victims who have come forward, there are countless others out there in Spain, and indeed around the world, who have been similarly victimized. To go by the statistics from the Organization itself, we must be talking about hundreds of thousands if not millions of individuals. But we also know that those who show mercy to the little one will be shown mercy themselves when judgment day arrives. Is that not the basis message of Jesus’ illustration of the sheep and goats. And we also have this assurance from our Lord Jesus:

“Whoever receives you receives me also, and whoever receives me receives also the One who sent me. Whoever receives a prophet because he is a prophet will get a prophet’s reward, and whoever receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man will get a righteous man’s reward. And whoever gives one of these little ones only a cup of cold water to drink because he is a disciple, I tell you truly, he will by no means lose his reward.” (Matthew 10:40-42)

So again, thank you Carlos for mounting such a good defense for the downtrodden and thank you also for exposing the truth about what is going on in this contemptable lawsuit brought against the victims of the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but doubling down on the persecution they have practiced.

I will continue to track the progress of these four lawsuits and will update you all on the progress as new information becomes available.

 

---

Archived Comments

We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.