by Willy Fautré, director of Human Rights Without Frontiers (HRWF) — Following the public denunciation of several sentences of anti-cult groups by French courts, one of them claims to be a victim of undue judicial harassment by cults or ‘their friends’ and also claims that its mission to warn against cults is supported by the European Parliament. This is false. A quick glance at the provided references of its sources shows that the European Parliament is silent on this subject.
Alleged support from the European Parliament
In a press release dated April 28, 2025, UNADFI (National Union of Associations for the Defense of Families and Individuals Victims of Cults)said it “is concerned about the increasing number of publications aimed at discrediting those involved in the fight against cult-like deviations: associations, MIVILUDES, or European prevention bodies.”
In the final part of its press release, UNADFI states: “Abusive legal proceedings aimed at intimidating researchers, journalists, and NGOs involved in the prevention of cult-like deviations have been clearly identified by the European Parliament (…) The Parliament’s 2021 report, followed by a directive in 2024, warns of the risks of the laws being exploited by certain groups with spiritual or ideological aims.” UNADFI’s references in its press release are not accompanied by any links to the said documents, which prevents readers from verifying their veracity. The Parliament’s Resolution – which, unlike the UNADFI press release says, is not a report – and the 2024 Directive have nothing to do with UNADFI’s accusations.
The said UNADFI references to the European Parliament’s support are empty shells
In the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 11, 2024, we can read: “In its resolution of 11 November 2021 on strengthening democracy and media freedom and pluralism in the Union, the European Parliament called on the Commission to propose a package of both soft and hard law to address the increasing number of strategic lawsuits against public participation (’SLAPPs’) concerning journalists, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), academics and civil society in the Union. The Parliament expressed the need for legislative measures in the areas of civil and criminal procedural law, such as a early dismissal mechanism for abusive civil lawsuits, the right to full award of costs incurred by the defendant and the right to compensation for damage. The resolution of 11 November 2021 also included a call for adequate training for judges and legal practitioners on SLAPPs, a specific fund to provide financial support to victims of SLAPPs and a public register of court decisions on SLAPP cases. In addition, the Parliament called for the revision of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council in order to prevent ‘libel tourism’ or ‘forum shopping’.”
At no point does this resolution specifically target the prevention of cultic deviations, or mention groups with ‘spiritual or ideological aims’. The scope covers: journalists, NGOs, academics and civil society.
Under the heading ‘Hate speech’, the Parliamentary Resolution of 11 November 2021 states: “The European Parliament (…)
11. Highlights that in recent years hate speech and discrimination in the media, both online and offline, as well as cyber-violence, have increased against journalists, NGOs, academics, rights defenders and other civil society actors, including those defending the rights of LGBTIQ people, gender equality issues, freedom of religion or belief” (…).
Here again, the resolution is not aimed at preventing cultic deviations or the use of the law by spiritual or ideological groups. It even condemns hate speech against defenders of freedom of religion or belief (!) and the Council of Europe’s Recommendations on the same subject in 2024 go in the same direction as the European Parliament.
This is a reversal of the victim status on the part of UNADFI, which is all the more astonishing given that UNADFI, which is financed with French taxpayers’ money, has a particularly bad record with the courts because of its failure to respect the rule of law and the laws of the Republic.
When UNADFI thinks it is above the law
The denunciation of the activities of UNADFI and other similar state-subsidised organisations sanctioned by the French courts does not constitute abusive judicial persecution, but rather well-founded and accessible open-source information, of which the following are a few recent examples:
On December 2, 2024, UNADFI was condemned by the Marseille Magistrates’ Court, and forced to publish CAPLC’s right of reply on its website within 48 hours, subject to a penalty of 50 euros per day of delay. Convinced it could escape the law, UNADFI appealed in summary proceedings to obtain suspension of the decision. This action was curtly dismissed by the Aix-en-Provence Court of Appeal.
Catherine Katz, President of UNADFI, had argued at the Court of Appeal that the very idea of publishing a right of reply was unbearable for her, and that the Court should allow her not to apply this legal obligation. It claimed that publishing this right of reply would jeopardize its rights with “extremely serious consequences”. The Court replied: “If the publication of the right of reply on its site is unbearable for the UNADFI association in view of the fundamental opposition which opposes it to the CAP LC association on the question and conception of individual freedom and certain values, it does not have the effect of ‘jeopardizing’ the rights of UNADFI."
For Thierry Valle, President of CAPLC, “UNADFI’s panic at the idea of having to publish a perfectly legal and, all things considered, moderate right of reply, is symptomatic of the fact that they think they won’t be able to pursue their mission if they are obliged to respect the law and the fundamental rights of citizens. What are they afraid of? Of the truth being exposed? Yes. And they are terrified that in the future, they may be forced to respect the law, and that their impunity will end.”
In addition, UNADFI is currently the subject of a preliminary investigation by the Parquet National Financier (National Financial Prosecutor’s Office) into suspicions of financial misappropriation linked to the distribution of subsidies by Miviludes in recent years. These pharaonic subsidies awarded to a number of anti-cult associations have already been referred to the Contentious Chamber by the Public Prosecutor at the National Audit Office (Cour des Comptes). According to the President of the National Audit Office (Cour des Comptes), Pierre Moscovici, the Contentious Chamber will now investigate “and possibly judge and condemn whoever is entitled to do so”, in what he considers to be “a serious matter.” Source: Nouvelle condamnation de l’UNADFI. Non, l’UNADFI n’est pas au-dessus des lois (CAP Liberté de conscience)
See five more older cases HERE.
Miviludes, another hunter of “cult-like deviations,” caught in the courts
Another organization hostile to certain religious or philosophical movements, funded by the French state with taxpayers’ money: Miviludes. Here are a few examples:
Miviludes condemned for accusing a kibboutz of « cultic deviances » in its report (2025)
Source : Dérives sectaires : une communauté obtient que la Miviludes change son dernier rapport
Source : La Miviludes condamnée pour avoir qualifié un kibboutz de dérive sectaire
Defamatory declarations of Miviludes against Jehovah’s Witnesses (2024)
Source : La Miviludes doit rectifier ses erreurs sur les Témoins de Jéhovah
Shri Ram Chandra prosecutes Miviludes and wins its case in court (2024)
Source : Shri Ram Chandra Mission : la Miviludes perd un procès
The Church of Scientology wins its case in court against a former president of Miviludes (2019)
Source : L’Eglise de Scientologie gagne un procès face à Georges Fenech
The case of anthroposophical medicine (2018)
Source: HRWF
