Stop the Policy of Isolation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia From the Global Community

Human Dimension Implementation Meeting 2013

Wednesday, 25 September 2013, 15:00 Working Session 5

To have to speak in the 21st century about the violation of the basic human right to free movement must be considered hugely shaming for mankind with its long history.

At this session I would like to attract the attention of the Participating States to the gross and severe violation that is the restriction of movement placed on the people of Abkhazia with regard to their travelling to the countries of Europe, the USA and elsewhere. I have to stress that, given its application to “the people of Abkhazia”, these disrespectful ruling acts against all the representatives of the various nations living in Abkhazia and obtaining Abkhazian citizenship. No matter if the person is Abkhazian, Russian, Armenian, Georgian, Jewish, Estonian or Polish, and no matter how long they have been settled in Abkhazia. They should have the right to move freely across the borders, even if Abkhazia is not yet fully internationally recognised; the people of the republic are, after all, no different from those who live in Europe or the USA. It seems the citizens of Abkhazia have been subjected to isolation (the airport and the seaport have been closed since the Georgian-Abkhazian war ended) and have had no right to lead a dignified life or to have contacts outside Abkhazia since 1994. Depriving the people(s) of Abkhazia of their rights is absolutely incomprehensible in the light of all human rights declarations and international covenants, or should one rather suppose that the right to travel freely is the right only of some privileged nations?

It is complicated to obtain visas for the citizens of Abkhazia, and most of the time impossible, even though the application is made in Moscow on the basis of the person's dual Russian citizenship. For example, especially since 2008, citizens of Abkhazia have had greater difficulty receiving visas to travel abroad, including to the United States and European Union countries, even when people apply to travel outside Abkhazia for medical or educational purposes,  which seems utterly unjust and unheard of in our time. About 90 percent of Abkhazia’s residents hold Russian passports, since Abkhazian travel documents are not internationally recognised. Here I would like to mention some cases when obtaining visas was denied to:

1. Children’s dance-ensemble seeking permission to travel to France, Turkey and Poland;

2. NGO-members for travel to Belgium, Lithuania and Franc;

3. Abkhazian leaders have repeatedly been refused visas and thus have not been able to put forward their visions and ideas at international fora;

4. Young Intellectuals hoping to participate in an event in Latvia;

5. Teenagers invited to the German International Peace Youth-Camp.

The USA and European states express support of the so-called “territorial integrity” of Georgia within the Stalinist borders of the former Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, and this does not promote any change in the Georgian position regarding recognition of the reality on the ground and improving the situation respecting the violation of the right to free movement for the citizens of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Why not think of human security and the protection of human rights rather than geopolitical implications?

Perhaps an in-depth analysis  done to discover the reasons behind the Georgian Parliament’s adoption of the Law on [the] Occupied Territories, which envisages a legal basis for restrictions on free movement and economic activities in these countries, would prove to be unfavourable for Georgia. In particular, according to the relevant law, foreign citizens should enter Abkhazia and South Ossetia only through Georgia. This is a pure violation of not just the rights of the people of our republics but also those rights of all others who should be free to visit Abkhazia/South Ossetia and communicate with us. Most cynical of all is the assertion that this document “was created to support” the peaceful resolution of the conflict, de-occupation and for humanitarian purposes, but at the same time it bans air-, sea- and railway-communications as well as international transit via Abkhazia/ South Ossetia,  mineral exploration and money-transfers. We consider that this should be appropriately evaluated and a way found to stop the policy of isolation of Abkhazia/South Ossetia from the global community and to assist in the building of real democratic states not the kind of pseudo-democracy as happened in Georgia,  where the government stands for the promotion of human rights and privileges for just one nation (viz., the Georgians).

Asida Lomiya
 
http://www.osce.org/odihr/106945

Mythical Occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia

Human Dimension Implementation Meeting 2013

Tuesday, 24 September 2013, 10:00 Working Session 2

Having a very short time it is so hard to speak on such an important issue as that which regrettably was touched upon yesterday in the statement of the Georgian representative concerning the presence of military bases of the Russian Federation both in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. We found it extremely one-sided, unjust and without any attempt either to offer unambiguous criteria for defining the term “occupation” or to apply appropriate argumentation and facts.

 Russian military bases in South Ossetia and Abkhazia were deployed on the basis of Russia's bilateral agreements with these republics and are mutually beneficial. To call the presence of the Russian bases “occupation” is utterly incorrect and does not correspond to reality. According to the Hague Conventions of 1907, specifically its "Laws and Customs of War on Land" (Hague IV) of 18 October 1907, "Section III Military Authority over the territory of the hostile State" states in Article 42: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. So nothing similar exists either in Abkhazia or South Ossetia today, and we can state this as citizens of these republics. To ignore the existence of the ethno-political Georgian-Abkhazian conflict and the problems surrounding ethnic compatibility between Georgians and Abkhazians after the bloody war of 1992-93 while muddying the waters by seeking to conceal all this under the imagined cloak of a confrontation between Georgia and Russia coupled with this purely mythical occupation is utterly useless from the point of view of understanding the actual situation on the ground in the region.

In the absence of an agreement on non-resumption of military activities between Georgia and Abkhazia/South Ossetia with international guarantees, the people simply see no alternative to the Russian presence in the region. Moreover, the fact that the European states continue to express support for the “territorial integrity” of Georgia within the borders of the former Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic does not promote any change in the Georgian position vis-a-vis recognition of actual reality. When the US Senate (on 29 July 2011) and the European parliament (on 17 November 2011) passed resolutions defining Abkhazia and South Ossetia in these very terms, they were proclaimed by Saakashvili to be "historic documents" laying the foundation for the (re)-establishment of Georgian control, although what their practical relevance will prove to have been remains an open question.

Georgia launched wars against our republics after the disintegration of the USSR as a consequence of its refusal to respect peoples’ desire to preserve their nation through obtaining  independence. Georgia’s belief in a “Georgia for the Georgians”  in Abkhazia turned to: (a) mass-persecution  and killing of Abkhazians during the war; (b) destruction of monuments of  Abkhaz culture; (c) and the deliberate torching of Abkhazia’s two state-archives, where historical manuscripts were kept.

Perhaps a thorough analysis carried out to discover the reasons and consequences for the presence of Russian military bases on Abkhazian soil will not turn out to be favourable to Georgia. If Georgia makes political mistakes, these should be appropriately evaluated. Georgia should admit that the pages of history cannot be turned back and stop trying to impose on the whole world a false interpretation of its biased imperial designs. We fully recommend Georgia to acknowledge Abkhazia/South Ossetia as fully authorised negotiating partners rather than  “occupied territories” ruled from outside. Such an agreement would definitely create a more favourable and useful atmosphere between the three states, which have essentially been in a state of war for the last 20 years and have at times, suffered severe violations of human rights.

  
Asida Lomiya

  http://www.osce.org/odihr/106944

Canonical Status of the Orthodox Community of Abkhazia and Restoration of an Independent Church of Abkhazia.

As we have so little time, I will try to do my best to describe shortly what the Abkhaz society is facing in regard with the canonical status of the Orthodox Church of Abkhazia. The situation is critic and remains thus 20 years despite  all this time  only the Russian church has delivered assistance.  The complexity and sensitivity of the issue is certain and worrying: the Abkhaz Orthodox church   after the Abkhaz- Georgian war continues to be in a legal vacuum. In these circumstances it is difficult to speak of a canonically - functioning institution of the church,  thus is  the diocese without the bishop, and it is evident that  major part of the Abkhaz people, which is Orthodox Christian, needs assistance to solve the problem of the church. In May 2011 the ecclesiastical essembly created  the Abkhaz Holy Metropolia in New Athos in Abkhazia. The essembly was convened by young Abkhaz priests at the New Athos Monastery cathedral. This is the first time since the years of Soviet era that such an event took place in the modern history of the Orthodoxy in Abkhazia in which the question of  the restoration of the Abkhaz church was raised.

The truth is that the restoration of the independence of the Abkhaz Church is necessary for a full-fledged life of this important institution, as well as the revival of Orthodoxy and enhancing spirituality of our people, is in the interests of our society.  Restoring of the independence of the Abkhaz Church will create such conditions that no one will be able to settle down any sect and extremist religious groups. Great importance lies in the restoration of the   Abkhaz Orthodox Church for recovery of moral and spiritual state of our society.

Abkhazia adopted Christianity in the 4th century and it had deep roots starting from the construction of the Abkhaz statehood in ancient times.  I will not go in describing all historic facts in details, but I have to mention the fact that in 1943 the Russian Orthodox Church, with the intrusion of Soviet power and a dictator Stalin personally, the first among the Orthodox Churches recognized the independence of the Georgian Church. In 1990 the Ecumenical Patriarchate  did not take into account all political circumstances of the past and present and granted autocephaly  and patriarchal status to  the Georgian Orthodox Church in the canonical borders  identified in 1943 between the Georgian and Russian Orthodox Churches within the  Soviet borders of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic. The relationship between the people of Abkhazia and the Georgian Church cannot be called friendly and fraternal. This is confirmed by the fact that during the period from 1918 to the present time, the Georgian Church has always supported nationalistic policy of Georgian authorities in regard of Abkhazians and other nations. The Georgian Patriarchate has never stood for ending bloody wars that took place in 1992-1993 and in 2008.  Orthodox multiethnic people of Abkhazia have never felt the pastoral support of Georgia and of the Georgian Orthodox Church hierarchs. Rather than condemnation of military action, the Georgian Church has always stressed the importance of restoring political borders of Georgia, thus justifying the chauvinistic policy of their state. Georgian Patriarch Iliya the 2^nd is acting like a politician, only in the interests of Georgia. For example, during the recent inter-ethnic conflict, the Georgian Patriarch said   not a word to stop the bloodshed and the war. In 2008, when Georgian troops shot civilians and Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, Patriarch Ilia 2nd did not utter anything to stop this inhuman perfidy. Everybody remembers both in Abkhazia and South Ossetia about the «Extraordinary order of the Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia Ilia II", published in the Tbilisi newspaper "Zaria Vostoka ", 30 October 1990, and two days earlier read out at Zion Cathedral after the church service:

"In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit command - wrote Ilia II, - now everyone who kills a  Georgian, is  declared an enemy of the Georgian people. Bring the name and the name of the killer in a special book of the Patriarchate and pass on from generation to generation as shameful and subject to condemnation. "

 After this xenophobic decree of the Georgian Catholicos of  Georgia, a wave of murders of the Ossetian population took place. Several thousand Ossetians in the early 90s were brutally murdered and missing. These crimes are not only not gone unnoticed by the Georgian spiritual leader, they are greatly encouraged his taciturn "blessing."

Natural reaction to such an attitude is that, the Orthodox community and the people of Abkhazia do not recognize the authority of the Georgian Orthodox Church and appealed to  the autocephalous Orthodox Churches against the jurisdiction of the Georgian Orthodox Church on the territory of the Republic of Abkhazia.  On this occasion, a poll of the population of Abkhazia was conducted, in which more than 70,000 people signed up to the issue of parting from the canonical jurisdiction of the Georgian Orthodox Church and Restoration of the Church of Abkhazia.

 Asida Lomiya

 http://www.osce.org/odihr/106640

 

 

 

 

 

Comment of the Abkhazian Foreign Ministry in connection with the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinval region / South Ossetia, Georgia

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged.
The MFA of Abkhazia has repeatedly highlighted to the international community the inadmissibility to support a document, which grossly distorted the political and humanitarian situation in the region. Once again, the adoption of this Resolution took place behind Abkhazia as the Abkhazian representatives again were refused to get the opportunity to address the members of the UN and present their position. Nevertheless, we have conducted the necessary work to inform certain countries about the arguments of the Abkhaz side.
The adopted Resolution can not contribute to a constructive process of the Working Group on Humanitarian Affairs of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. The MFA of Abkhazia reiterates the unacceptability of taking the issues of the agenda of the Geneva discussions outside of this international forum.
It should be noted that the majority of the world’s countries - more than 120 - did not support this politicized document. The number of states that voted against the draft resolution proposed by Georgia increased.
We should emphasize that the above resolution is only advisory and has no legal effect. At the same time, constant Georgia's efforts to railroad such a politically committed document may be indicative of the immutability of a hostile course of the Georgian state, despite the change of government in this country.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia in the near future will provide detailed comments on the adoption of the Resolution, as well as on the relevant report of the UN Secretary General. 

- See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpu

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged.
The MFA of Abkhazia has repeatedly highlighted to the international community the inadmissibility to support a document, which grossly distorted the political and humanitarian situation in the region. Once again, the adoption of this Resolution took place behind Abkhazia as the Abkhazian representatives again were refused to get the opportunity to address the members of the UN and present their position. Nevertheless, we have conducted the necessary work to inform certain countries about the arguments of the Abkhaz side.
The adopted Resolution can not contribute to a constructive process of the Working Group on Humanitarian Affairs of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. The MFA of Abkhazia reiterates the unacceptability of taking the issues of the agenda of the Geneva discussions outside of this international forum.
It should be noted that the majority of the world’s countries - more than 120 - did not support this politicized document. The number of states that voted against the draft resolution proposed by Georgia increased.
We should emphasize that the above resolution is only advisory and has no legal effect. At the same time, constant Georgia's efforts to railroad such a politically committed document may be indicative of the immutability of a hostile course of the Georgian state, despite the change of government in this country.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia in the near future will provide detailed comments on the adoption of the Resolution, as well as on the relevant report of the UN Secretary General.
- See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpuf

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged. - See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpuf

15.06.2013

Comment of the Abkhazian Foreign Ministry in connection with the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgi

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged.
The MFA of Abkhazia has repeatedly highlighted to the international community the inadmissibility to support a document, which grossly distorted the political and humanitarian situation in the region. Once again, the adoption of this Resolution took place behind Abkhazia as the Abkhazian representatives again were refused to get the opportunity to address the members of the UN and present their position. Nevertheless, we have conducted the necessary work to inform certain countries about the arguments of the Abkhaz side.
The adopted Resolution can not contribute to a constructive process of the Working Group on Humanitarian Affairs of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. The MFA of Abkhazia reiterates the unacceptability of taking the issues of the agenda of the Geneva discussions outside of this international forum.
It should be noted that the majority of the world’s countries - more than 120 - did not support this politicized document. The number of states that voted against the draft resolution proposed by Georgia increased.
We should emphasize that the above resolution is only advisory and has no legal effect. At the same time, constant Georgia's efforts to railroad such a politically committed document may be indicative of the immutability of a hostile course of the Georgian state, despite the change of government in this country.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia in the near future will provide detailed comments on the adoption of the Resolution, as well as on the relevant report of the UN Secretary General.
- See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpuf

Comment of the Abkhazian Foreign Ministry in connection with the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgi

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged.
The MFA of Abkhazia has repeatedly highlighted to the international community the inadmissibility to support a document, which grossly distorted the political and humanitarian situation in the region. Once again, the adoption of this Resolution took place behind Abkhazia as the Abkhazian representatives again were refused to get the opportunity to address the members of the UN and present their position. Nevertheless, we have conducted the necessary work to inform certain countries about the arguments of the Abkhaz side.
The adopted Resolution can not contribute to a constructive process of the Working Group on Humanitarian Affairs of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. The MFA of Abkhazia reiterates the unacceptability of taking the issues of the agenda of the Geneva discussions outside of this international forum.
It should be noted that the majority of the world’s countries - more than 120 - did not support this politicized document. The number of states that voted against the draft resolution proposed by Georgia increased.
We should emphasize that the above resolution is only advisory and has no legal effect. At the same time, constant Georgia's efforts to railroad such a politically committed document may be indicative of the immutability of a hostile course of the Georgian state, despite the change of government in this country.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia in the near future will provide detailed comments on the adoption of the Resolution, as well as on the relevant report of the UN Secretary General.
- See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpuf

Comment of the Abkhazian Foreign Ministry in connection with the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgi

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged.
The MFA of Abkhazia has repeatedly highlighted to the international community the inadmissibility to support a document, which grossly distorted the political and humanitarian situation in the region. Once again, the adoption of this Resolution took place behind Abkhazia as the Abkhazian representatives again were refused to get the opportunity to address the members of the UN and present their position. Nevertheless, we have conducted the necessary work to inform certain countries about the arguments of the Abkhaz side.
The adopted Resolution can not contribute to a constructive process of the Working Group on Humanitarian Affairs of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. The MFA of Abkhazia reiterates the unacceptability of taking the issues of the agenda of the Geneva discussions outside of this international forum.
It should be noted that the majority of the world’s countries - more than 120 - did not support this politicized document. The number of states that voted against the draft resolution proposed by Georgia increased.
We should emphasize that the above resolution is only advisory and has no legal effect. At the same time, constant Georgia's efforts to railroad such a politically committed document may be indicative of the immutability of a hostile course of the Georgian state, despite the change of government in this country.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia in the near future will provide detailed comments on the adoption of the Resolution, as well as on the relevant report of the UN Secretary General.
- See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpuf

Comment of the Abkhazian Foreign Ministry in connection with the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgi

Adoption by the UN General Assembly on June 13 this year of a biased and highly politicized Resolution on "the situation of internally displaced persons and refugees from Abkhazia, Georgia, and the Tskhinvali region / South Ossetia, Georgia" is not a surprise. This is the sixth in a row annual Resolution proposed by Georgia, the content of which remains virtually unchanged.
The MFA of Abkhazia has repeatedly highlighted to the international community the inadmissibility to support a document, which grossly distorted the political and humanitarian situation in the region. Once again, the adoption of this Resolution took place behind Abkhazia as the Abkhazian representatives again were refused to get the opportunity to address the members of the UN and present their position. Nevertheless, we have conducted the necessary work to inform certain countries about the arguments of the Abkhaz side.
The adopted Resolution can not contribute to a constructive process of the Working Group on Humanitarian Affairs of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. The MFA of Abkhazia reiterates the unacceptability of taking the issues of the agenda of the Geneva discussions outside of this international forum.
It should be noted that the majority of the world’s countries - more than 120 - did not support this politicized document. The number of states that voted against the draft resolution proposed by Georgia increased.
We should emphasize that the above resolution is only advisory and has no legal effect. At the same time, constant Georgia's efforts to railroad such a politically committed document may be indicative of the immutability of a hostile course of the Georgian state, despite the change of government in this country.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia in the near future will provide detailed comments on the adoption of the Resolution, as well as on the relevant report of the UN Secretary General.
- See more at: http://mfaapsny.org/en/information/index.php?ID=1235#sthash.g4dluzQP.dpuf

Georgian Patriarch Ilia II acts as a politician - only in the interests of Georgia: Interview

The status of the Abkhazian church has been strongly discussed in the Abkhaz society and Internet space  community. The reason for this became a recent statement of  the President Alexander Ankvab, in which  he gave an estimate of the church  problem. Hierodiakon David (Sarsaniya)  the vice-chairman "of the Holy Metropolis of Abkhazia" in Sukhum answered the questions of  REGNUM correspondent .

REGNUM: Father David, the president of Abkhazia Alexander Ankvab, speaking recently at the Russian-Abkhaz Humanitarian Forum, expressed his attitude to the Abkhaz Orthodox Church;s status. In particular, he said that «the Moscow Patriarchate can and should  take this great mission.» How would you comment on this statement? And is it possible, according to this statement, to assess unambiguously which side Ankvab supports in the Abkhaz Church problem?

I am  not  able to say concretely which side the President of Abkhazia supports. But in the statement  he is saying that :” with deep respect to the  Ecumenical  Patriarch, Constantinople one should say  is very far of  settling the problems of  the Abkhaz church, and one may consider the Russian Church  to participate in  the ordination of the bishop for the Orthodox community of Abkhazia” I think this isn't right.

Officially the Holy Patriarch of all Russia  Kirill, as well as the Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) has repeatedly declared this. But independently without the participation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, this problem can not be solved. Ecumenical Patriarchate is the first in the status of the independent Orthodox churches, so its relation to the problems of the Orthodox churches in the world is absolutely different. Ecumenical Patriarchate in 1990 granted autocephaly to the Georgian Orthodox Church Patriarchate. For 25 years, the Georgian Church in relation to the Russian Orthodox Church was a schismatic group, but for all the Orthodox churches, the Georgian church, before being recognized by Ecumenical Patriarchate, remained autonomous within the Russian Orthodox Church.

 REGNUM:  If speaking about the meeting held in March 28 in Sochi, attended by Alexandr Ankvab  and the representatives of  the Russian  and Georgian Churches, the president of Abkhazia expressed unambiguous assessment, at least,  as before it was  said and written that he supported the ideas of the Holy Metropolis of Abkhazia. Did he change his mind in supporting you? What is the reason of  he speaks about at the forum, what do you think?

Our government has always said that it distances itself from church and of the so-called split in Abkhazia. The President Ankvab did not coordinate this trip to Sochi with the clergy of Abkhazia, as well as with the father Vissarion’s side from Sukhum - Pitsunda diocese, and the representatives of the Holy Metropolis of Abkhazia either.

But for us it's not new what Alexander Ankvab heard at a meeting on March 28 in Sochi. At this meeting, we are more than confident, Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) said about the only way of pastoral care of the Abkhaz Orthodox community, which is the mechanism of double ecclesiastical jurisdiction on the territory of Abkhazia. The Russian Orthodox Church recognizes Abkhazian church still the part of the Georgian church. This means that in agreement with the Georgian Church, the Moscow Patriarchate will ordain someone to the episcopacy and send him to Abkhazia. Such a policy between the ROC and GOC in this matter is clear, otherwise, Metropolitan Seraphim (Jojua) as the official face of the GOC would not attend this meeting.
 In the proposal  of the Russian Orthodox Church  the status of the Abkhaz Church as independent from the Georgian is not considered, so that is why the  president Ankvab said that the relations of Abkhazia with the  Georgian clergy could no longer continue.

REGNUM: Father David, you for sure know about the  Ilia II's visit to the Ecumenical Patriarch. Following this meeting, the Georgian Patriarch said that he planned to visit Abkhazia. Do you think  such a visit is possible?

Absolutely impossible. Georgian Patriarch is acting like a politician, only in the interests of Georgia. For example, during the recent inter-ethnic conflict, the Georgian Patriarch said   not a word to stop the bloodshed and  the war. In 2008, when Georgian troops shot civilians and Russian peacekeepers in Tskhinval, Patriarch Ilia did not say anything to stop this inhuman perfidy. And when Russia stood up in defense of South Ossetia, he immediately turned to then - Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to stop military operations against Georgia. But why he did not make such statements to his people and the Government of Georgia, the whole day when the shelling of Tskhinval took place? So, when there is no war, they say we are their brothers, and when the war begins, the Georgian Church declares the restoration of Georgia's borders. That is why, whatever the Georgian Patriarch said, referring to the Russian Orthodox Church or the Ecumenical Patriarch - it is his personal opinion and  it does not concern Abkhazia.
I also believe that the trip of the Georgian Patriarch to Constantinople had an aim to block the Abkhaz Orthodox people’s  opportunity to discuss the future of their own  Church themselves.

 This article was published by REGNUM and is translated from Russian.

 http://www.regnum.ru/news/fd-abroad/polit/1667693.html#ixzz2VLl9aYwH

.

Грузинский патриарх Илия II действует как политик - только в интересах Грузии: интервью

В абхазском обществе и интернет-пространстве бурно обсуждаются вопросы Абхазского церковного статуса. Поводом для этого стало недавнее заявление президента страны Александра Анкваб, где он дал оценку проблеме. На вопросы корреспондента ИА REGNUM в Сухуме ответил иеродиакон Давид (Сарсания), заместитель председателя "Священной Митрополии Абхазии".

ИА REGNUM: Отец Давид, президент Абхазии Александр Анкваб, недавно выступая на российско-абхазском гуманитарном форуме, выразил свое отношение к решению вопроса статуса АПЦ. В частности, им было сказано, что "эту великую миссию может и должен взять на себя Московский патриархат". Как бы вы могли прокомментировать это заявление? И можно ли, исходя из этого заявления, дать однозначную оценку того, какую сторону в абхазском церковном вопросе поддерживает Анкваб?

Я не могу конкретно сказать какую сторону поддерживает президент Абхазии. Но заявление, в котором он говорит, что "при глубоком уважении к Вселенскому Патриарху, Константинополь все же находится очень далеко от участия в разрешении проблем Абхазской церкви, и на рукоположение епископа для православной общины Абхазии можно рассчитывать при участии РПЦ", я считаю неправильным.

Официально Святейший Патриарх всея Руси Кирилл, а также председатель Отдела внешних церковных связей РПЦ митрополит Иларион (Алфеев) неоднократно уже об этом заявляли. Но самостоятельно РПЦ, без участия Вселенской Патриархии, этот вопрос решить не может. Вселенская Патриархия является первой по статусу среди независимых Православных церквей, поэтому ее отношение к проблемам Православных церквей во всем мире - это совершенно другое отношение. Вселенская Патриархия в 1990 году даровала автокефалию и патриарший статус Грузинской церкви. Целых 25 лет Грузинская церковь в отношении к РПЦ была раскольничьей группой, а для всех Православных церквей, Грузинская церковь, до признания ее Вселенской патриархией, так и оставалась автономной в составе РПЦ.

ИА REGNUM: Если говорить о встрече, которая состоялась 28 марта с.г. в Сочи, где присутствовали Александр Анкваб и представители Русской и Грузинской церквей, то президент Абхазии высказал однозначную оценку, по крайне мере так говорилось и писалось, что он поддерживает те идеи, которые выдвигает Священная Митрополия Абхазии. Он передумал вас поддерживать? С чем связано то, что он говорил на форуме, как вы считаете?

Наша власть всегда говорила, что она дистанцируется от церковного, так называемого, раскола в Абхазии. Президент Анкваб не согласовывал эту поездку в Сочи со священнослужителями Абхазии, как и со стороной отца Виссариона, т.е. с Сухумо-Пицундской Епархией, так и с представителями Священной Митрополии Абхазии.

Но для нас не ново то, что услышал Александр Анкваб на встрече 28 марта в Сочи. На этой встрече, мы более чем уверены, митрополит Иларион (Алфеев) говорил о единственном пути окормления абхазской православной общины, которое заключается в механизме двойной церковной юрисдикции на территории Абхазии, то есть РПЦ все равно признает Абхазскую церковь частью Грузинкой церкви. Это означает, что по согласованию с Грузинской церковью, Московская патриархия посвятит кого-то во епископы и пошлет его в Абхазию. Такая политика между РПЦ и ГПЦ в этом вопросе очевидна, иначе митрополит Серафим (Джоджуа), как официальное лицо от ГПЦ не присутствовал бы на этой встрече.

В этом предложении со стороны РПЦ не рассматривается статус Абхазской церкви, как независимой от ГПЦ, поэтому президент Анкваб заявил, что никакие отношения Абхазии с грузинским духовенством больше не могут продолжаться.

ИА REGNUM: Отец Давид, вам, наверняка, известен визит Илии Второго к Вселенскому патриарху. После этой встречи грузинский патриарх сообщил, что планирует посетить Абхазию. Как вы думаете, возможен ли подобный визит?

Абсолютно невозможен. Грузинский патриарх во всем действует как политик, только в интересах Грузии. Например, во время последних межнациональных конфликтов, грузинский патриарх не сказал ни одного слова, чтобы остановить кровопролитие и войну. В 2008 году, когда грузинские войска расстреливали мирных жителей и российских миротворцев в Цхинвале, патриарх Илия не сказал ни слова для прекращения этого бесчеловечного вероломства. А когда Россия вступилась в защиту Южной Осетии, то он сразу же обратился к тогдашнему президенту России Дмитрию Медведеву и премьер-министру Владимиру Путину с просьбой прекратить военные действия против Грузии. Но почему же он не делал таких заявлений к своему народу и к правительству Грузии, когда целые сутки шел обстрел Цхинвала? Получается, когда войны нет они говорят, что мы их братья, а когда война начинается, то Грузинская церковь заявляет о восстановлении границ Грузии. Потому-то, все, что говорит грузинский Патриарх, ссылаясь на РПЦ или Вселенскую патриархию, - это его личное мнение, и Абхазии это не касается.

Считаю также, что поездка грузинского патриарха в Константинополь была направлена на то, чтобы заблокировать для абхазского православного народа возможность обсуждения своего церковного будущего

.
 http://www.regnum.ru/news/fd-abroad/polit/1667693.html#ixzz2VLl9aYwH

Священная Митрополия Абхазии официально зарегистрирована

06.06.2013

5 июня 2013 года в Министерстве юстиции  Республики Абхазия была зарегистрирована религиозная христианская организация – «Священная Митрополия Абхазии», кафедра которой располагается в г. Новый Афон (историческое название – Анакопия).

Как рассказал секретарь Митрополии Герман Маршания корреспонденту "Эхо Кавказа", процесс регистрации был достаточно долгим. 15 мая 2011 года около 2000 человек собрались в Новоафонском монастыре на Церковно-Народное собрание. 700 полномочных делегатов православного вероисповедания из всех районов Абхазии приняли решение о создании Священной Митрополии Абхазии, делегировав полномочия учредителей десяти избранным на Собрании членам Совета. 20 мая 2011 года прошло первое заседание Совета, на котором был принят и одобрен Устав церковной организации. За этим последовало обращение в соответствующие органы власти. Однако, оказалось, что в Абхазии отсутствует соответствующая нормативно-правовая база для регистрации религиозных организаций. Лишь10 октября 2012 года был принят Закон "О свободе совести и о религиозных объединениях", который вступил в силу 31 марта 2012 года.

Согласно данному закону, после регистрации Священная Митрополия Абхазии продолжит свою деятельность уже как полноправная юридическая организация со всеми предусмотренными Законом правами и обязанностями.