Dvorkin’s Totalitarian Sect. 2009: Expert Council

“I realized that an expert isn’t the one who knows something, but the one who is asked.” A. Dvorkin ¹

In our opinion, the year 2009 was a turning point in the fate of democratic reforms and religious freedoms in Russia, marking their actual dismantling. It was then that the notorious Expert Council on State Religious Evaluation at the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation finally outlined a course to restrict religious diversity. Its reshaped board, led by Alexander Dvorkin, not only legitimized new mechanisms of pressure on undesirable denominations, but also launched the very flywheel of subsequent repression and became a tool for suppressing religious minorities in Russia under the guise of combating extremism. The final stage of the anticult campaign in the run-up to the great war began; exactly the same as the one led by Walter Künneth a century ago in Nazi Germany. We wrote about this in detail many times before, in particular, in our earlier article “Dvorkin’s Totalitarian Sect. Revival of Nazism.”

Moreover, we discussed the striking historical analogy that we managed to discern when the increased anticult activity and successful purging of so-called “undesirable cultists and sectarians” took place in both cases — in Germany in 1920-1940 and in Russia in 2000-2014, as a preliminary stage before the outbreak of a large-scale aggressive war. When a country prepares for an armed invasion, it is faced with the task of forming a powerful ideological foundation among the population, primarily through suppression of religious minorities. After all, in conditions of religious pluralism where various faiths peacefully coexist and are recognized as equal, it’s extremely difficult to mobilize people for aggressive military actions against a neighboring country. However, judging by the information voiced by Egon Cholakian in the video “Undeclared War,” ambitions of the architects of this global conflict extended much farther than Ukraine.

On the example of present-day Russia, we can see that along with the anticult campaign, this process was accompanied by active indoctrination of society through mass media, brainwashing, creating an image of internal and external enemies, restricting civil rights and freedoms, strengthening government control over freedom of religion and conscience, and amending Russian legislation. The religious factor was later used for political purposes. Finally, this process matured to the armed invasion of thousands of military onto the territory of Ukraine and the beginning of genocide against the Ukrainian population. All of this happening in the 21st century…

Alexander Dvorkin and his RACIRS (Russian Association of Centers for the Study of Religions and Sects) have been directly involved in these processes. A number of articles on our website are dedicated to exposing their terrorist activities. History has yet to understand his role in the tragic events of recent decades.

Yet, let’s return to 2009, to the Expert Council on State Religious Evaluation under the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation ². First, we’d like to note that at that point, the start of hostilities in Donbas and the annexation of Crimea were a whole 5 years away. The Expert Council was initially established as an advisory body in 1998. However, in 2009, it underwent an unexpected and drastic change in its composition and membership, and Dvorkin became its head.

We don’t know whose “brilliant” idea it was to put Dvorkin at the head of the reshaped council. However, the above scheme deserves attention, as it clearly implies the hand of someone who was interested to gather, instead of an independent academic council, a “combat” team of radical anticult adherents to fulfill specifically assigned tasks.

At that time, human rights activists, researchers and representatives of religious organizations expressed extreme dissatisfaction with the new council membership, noting the lack of specialists with necessary qualifications and expertise in religious studies ³. It’s not surprising since it included only one religious scholar. This raised doubts about the council’s competence in carrying out expert evaluations. Critics expressed concern that the council’s activities could result in restrictions on freedom of conscience and religion as well as increased government control over religious associations, which contradicts the principles of democratic society. Actually, what they warned about in unison back in 2009 has eventually occurred.

We’ll talk about those critical opinions in our next article, while for now we suggest trying to answer the following questions: Was reshaping of the Expert Council part of a preconceived plan, and who was behind it?

Alexander Konovalov

Technically, the Expert Council was established by a collective decision within the Ministry of Justice in 1998 ². However, Alexander Konovalov ⁴, who took office as the Minister of Justice of the Russian Federation in 2008, is undoubtedly directly responsible for reshaping the council’s structure in 2009 and its continued support. His personal role in this process was key, especially considering his ideological views and closeness to the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). 

At one point, Konovalov was even called a “secret monk,” to which he responded in an interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta (“Russian Newspaper”): 

“Rumors about my ‘secret monasticism’ are some of the most foolish and ignorant gossip spread in recent years. However, I did receive an Orthodox theological education. I studied part-time at Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox University of Humanities (PSTGU) ⁵ while working at the prosecutor’s office.”

Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox University of Humanities ⁶ as a Russian forge of anticultism was previously mentioned in our article “Modern Inquisition Within the Russian Orthodox Church. PART 1.” It was at this institution that Dvorkin himself once taught. As former RACIRS member Valery Ostavnykh claimed in an interview to Islam News, minister Konovalov is actually Dvorkin’s student!⁷

Konovalov and Dvorkin: Who manipulated whom?

No one can deny that the former Russian Minister of Justice and the country’s leading sectologist know each other. Dvorkin was most likely Konovalov’s professor, and years later, after becoming minister, Konovalov appointed the sectologist to a very important position — a key position in the fight against democratic freedoms in Russia, we might say. We will elaborate on this topic in upcoming articles. 

The question, however, is different: Who actually manipulated whom in this case? Did Dvorkin accept the offer of the higher-ranking Konovalov to head the council, or did Konovalov fall under the influence of Dvorkin’s toxic ideas?

The fact that, contrary to the principles of secular society and constitutional foundations, the Russian Minister of Justice supported the idea of tightening control over religious groups can, to some extent, be explained. As a “devout” Christian, he pursued a general policy aimed at strengthening “spiritual security” and fostering closer cooperation between government authorities and the ROC, or the Moscow Patriarchate (MP).

But how can one explain the presence of the Russian Minister of Justice at the international conference of the anticult organization FECRIS that has an extremely questionable reputation in Europe? Moreover, this event took place in May 2009 in the Russian city of St. Petersburg where, incidentally, Alexander Dvorkin was elected vice president of FECRIS. How can one explain the closed-door meeting with its leaders and the photos with Dvorkin? A public speech by Konovalov was even expected at this gathering, but for some reason, things didn’t go as planned, and his opening greeting was instead read by his trusted representative. Thus, the government official was in the midst of anticultists back in the times when the phrase “in our country, the church is separate from the state” did not evoke laughter in Russia.

We do not have a definite answer as to who was behind Dvorkin’s appointment as chairman of the Expert Council. It’s quite possible that he himself initiated his own appointment, presenting his ideas and views as the foundation for a new supervisory body. What is absolutely clear, however, is who assembled the council’s members as a single board. Alexander Shchipkov, Lev Semenov, Roman Silantyev, Alexander Kuzmin, Evgeny Mukhtarov, and Andrey Vasilchenko — all of these figures are known for their rigid fundamentalist stances on religious issues and their ties to anticultism, and all of them were “dragged in” by none other than Alexander Dvorkin. Semenov, Kuzmin, and Mukhtarov were all part of RACIRS. It was Dvorkin who formed the backbone of the council which later became both a symbol and an instrument of state control over the country’s spiritual life.

Another interesting fact is described below.

Expansion of authority

By orders signed on February 18 and March 3, 2009, the Russian Minister of Justice Alexander Konovalov not only updated the list of the Expert Council members, but also approved the procedure for carrying out state religious evaluations and significantly expanded the council’s powers. This allowed the council to investigate the activities, teachings, leadership decisions, literature, and religious rituals of any registered religious organization and to provide recommendations to the Ministry of Justice regarding various actions. 

From that point on, the Expert Council had the authority to determine whether the activities or literature of a particular religious organization contradicted the Constitution of the Russian Federation or aligned with the organization’s original statements. Based on this, the council could recommend that the Ministry of Justice take corresponding action in the event of identified violations.

The council’s official tasks were as follows:

1. To determine the religious nature of an organization based on its founding documents, information about the principles of its doctrine, and corresponding practices.
2. To verify and assess the accuracy of the information contained in the documents submitted by a religious organization regarding the foundations of its doctrine.
3. To check whether the forms and methods of activity declared during the state registration of a religious organization matched its actual activities.

In other words — pay attention! — the council headed by Dvorkin became a supervisory and advisory body empowered to issue recommendations to the Russian Ministry of Justice! Thus, the man without an appropriate education, who also had documented psychiatric diagnosis of a mental disorder in his youth, and who is maniacally obsessed with labeling all undesirables as cultists and sectarians, became a mega-expert and arbiter, covertly shaping the direction of the country’s development, wielding influence over religions, and determining fates of millions of people.

Bound by the same chain and united by the same goal

Let us briefly outline the outward connections of Dvorkin’s “combat team,” for historical record, so to speak.

Alexander Shchipkov and Alexander Dvorkin:

• Alexander Shchipkov is a prominent representative of the anticult movement in Russia, actively advocating for the protection of traditional values and the fight against destructive cults.
• Both Shchipkov and Dvorkin once attended lectures by Johannes Aagaard at Aarhus University. ⁸
• In 1993, the two co-authored the term “totalitarian sect.” 
• Today, Alexander Shchipkov serves as the deputy head of the World Russian People’s Council (WRPC). ^{9, 10}
• His ideas are often linked to the concept of “spiritual security,” aimed at protecting society from the influence of Western values, cults, sects, and non-traditional religions.

Roman Silantyev and Alexander Dvorkin:

• Both were key figures in the Expert Council on State Religious Evaluation under the Russian Ministry of Justice, with Dvorkin serving as chairman and Silantyev as deputy chairman.
• Together, they participated in evaluating the activities of religious organizations and formed recommendations for prohibition or restriction of those, particularly of new religious movements (NRMs) they labeled as “sects” and “cults.”
• Both are affiliated with the Center for Religious Studies in the Name of Hieromartyr Irenaeus of Lyons ¹¹, established by Dvorkin. Silantyev has repeatedly served as an expert there.
• They were involved in compilation of “blacklists of sects and cults” where they included Jehovah’s Witnesses, Scientology, the Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon, and others.
• Criticism of NRMs: Both labeled new religious movements as “totalitarian sects,” accusing them of mind manipulation, destruction of families, and severing ties with society.
• They actively promoted the idea that the ROC is the foundation of Russia’s spiritual security.
• “Spiritual security” concept: Their works and speeches are aimed to counteract “Western influence” through religious groups.
• Joint publications: Silantyev and Dvorkin often cited each other in their works. For example, Silantyev referenced Dvorkin’s studies in his book “Modern History of Islam in Russia.”
• They appeared on the same TV programs (e.g. on the Spas channel) where they criticized “sects” and “cults” and supported anticult legislation.
• Both acted as experts in drafting laws against “religious extremism,” which were later used to ban groups like Jehovah’s Witnesses.
• Government grants: Their organizations and research have been frequently funded with government resources or through government-affiliated entities.
• Dvorkin and Silantyev repeatedly used terms like “fascism” and “Nazism” to describe the Ukrainian authorities, especially after 2014. Their stance is part of a broader “Russian World” ideology which was used to justify aggression.

Alexander Kuzmin and Alexander Dvorkin:

• Both are members of RACIRS (Russian Association of Centers for the Study of Religions and Sects).
• Alexander Kuzmin represented RACIRS’ branch in Saratov.

Lev Semenov and Alexander Dvorkin:

• Both are members of RACIRS (Russian Association of Centers for the Study of Religions and Sects).

Evgeny Mukhtarov and Alexander Dvorkin:

• Evgeny Mukhtarov ² is the head of the press service of the Center for Religious Studies in the name of Hieromartyr Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons ¹¹.
• Mukhtarov is Dvorkin’s biographer.
• Both are members of the Russian Association of Centers for the Study of Religions and Sects (RACIRS).

Evgeny Mukhtarov and Andrey Vasilchenko:

Evgeny Mukhtarov “pulled” Andrey Vasilchenko into the Expert Council. They lived in the same city, Yaroslavl, and knew each other well.

It is astonishing how a person who has dedicated himself to studying the history of Nazi Germany, who holds peculiar views on Hitlerism and has written over 30 books on the history of the Third Reich, ended up being a member of the Expert Council under the Russian Ministry of Justice. A note was found on one of the forums, stating that Vasilchenko had the nickname “Aryan Strapper” ¹² in his circle. As the saying goes, “Russia is baffling to the mind.” Although, to be honest, there’s nothing baffling here: members of the “independent academic” council were definitely selected by Dvorkin based not on professional criteria, but rather on personal sympathies and connections.

In addition, in the 1990s, Mukhtarov and Vasilchenko were members of the League of Patriotic Youth — an organization that had a clear Nazi bias. This becomes evident at first glance at its emblem, which was officially registered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation ¹³.

What were religious scholars and human rights activists afraid of in 2009?

Even back in 2009, many had reasonable concerns that ideological control would take hold in Russia, as the reshaped Expert Council, under the guise of protecting constitutional norms and combating extremism, effectively started to legalize state censorship in the religious sphere. The organization became a tool for suppressing any dissent that did not align with the current political agenda of the authorities, or more specifically, the agenda of the intertwined power of the ROC MP.

They feared that Nazism would be revived in Russia through the following manifestations:

1. The threat to freedom of conscience.

The mechanism for verifying the “authenticity” of teachings and practices would create a precedent for total intervention not by the state or the titular religion, but by Alexander Dvorkin himself (!) into the spiritual lives of citizens. Under the guise of combating extremism and fraud, Dvorkin would gain the authority to declare any religious groups “undesirable”—from independent churches to mystical communities. This constitutes a direct violation of Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which guarantees freedom of religion.

2. Legalization of repressions. Recommendations from the reshaped Expert Council to the Ministry of Justice will not be “measures against violations” but a system of extrajudicial repressions. Organizations could be liquidated without public hearings and independent expertise, resembling practices from the USSR or modern authoritarian regimes. Such an approach undermines the presumption of innocence and paves the way for mass bans on “undesirable” movements.

3. Centralization of power and suppression of civil society. 

The Expert Council will concentrate a monopoly on defining what constitutes “correct” religion in the hands of a narrow group of individuals (essentially, experts loyal to Dvorkin). This resembles part of a broader strategy to eradicate horizontal social connections and replace them with a vertical system of anticult control. Religious organizations that fall outside the doctrine of the ROC MP would become targets for elimination as potential centers of resistance.

4. Risk of ethnic-confessional division. They feared that the selective  application of these measures (for example, against “cults” or religious communities that were unconventional for certain regions) could provoke discrimination based on national or cultural criteria. This would exacerbate interreligious tensions, especially in multi-confessional regions of the Russian Federation, and undermine the secular nature of the state.

5. Creating a precedent for expanding the repressive apparatus. 

There were also concerns that the successful implementation of this model in the religious sphere would pave the way for the establishment of similar “expert councils” in other areas — such as culture, science, and education. This, in turn, could lead to the total unification of public life under the control of religious ideologists, law enforcement agencies, and the authorities.

6. Distortion of the foundations of Orthodoxy. 

Many feared that Dvorkin would continue to use religious rhetoric to justify inquisitorial repressions, reviving forgotten dark times. For example, his views and ‘expert’ reports targeting new religious movements have consistently ignored the principles of compassion and love for one’s neighbor, which are the very cornerstones of Christianity. Many worried that the focus on “spiritual war” and “heresies” could lead to the complete stigmatization of religious minorities and even their genocide.

7. Dvorkin’s mental deviation. 

Intelligent people considered him mentally unwell, and his ideas as extremely dangerous for society, potentially leading to unforeseen consequences on a national scale. 

2009 — the year of departure from constitutional principles

In the article “Problems of Implementing Freedom of Conscience in Russia in 2009” ¹⁴ authored by Alexander Verkhovsky and Olga Sibireva, the following lines stand out:

“The year 2009 marked a significant departure from the constitutional principles of secularism. This departure is perhaps the most substantial since the adoption of the law on freedom of conscience in 1997, or at least since 2002, when there were heated discussions regarding concepts of state-religious relations based on privileges for ‘traditional religious organizations’.

President Dmitry Medvedev, unlike his predecessor, decided to take decisive steps toward closer ties… primarily with the Russian Orthodox Church. This is not about symbolic gestures or financial support, which characterized the rapprochement policy  under Vladimir Putin’s leadership. In 2009, decisions were made in two areas that were most crucial for the ROC and other leading organizations of ‘traditional religions’: the establishment of a military chaplaincy institute and the allowance of religious education in schools.”

Unfortunately, their concerns have proved to be true.

And further:

“On February 18, 2009, a directive from the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation was published regarding ‘State Religious Studies Expertise.’ The document established a new procedure for conducting state religious studies expertise, rendering the procedure established in 1998 null and void. 

The old procedure required religious studies expertise only during the registration of a new religious organization whose teachings had not previously been assessed for compliance with the concept of a ‘religious organization.’ The new procedure significantly expanded the scope for involving religious studies expertise. Ministry officials can now seek assistance from the Expert Council if there is suspicion of extremist activity within an organization, particularly if a member has been implicated in extremist activities or if any materials distributed by the organization have been deemed extremist. 

In principle, such checks are quite appropriate, and involving experts is desirable; however, the very idea of assessing the entire organization for ‘extremism’ every time an individual commits a relevant illegal act seems questionable, especially when applied to large religious organizations like the ROC.”

Also:

“Religion in the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement Structures 

In 2009, a decision was made to introduce a military chaplaincy in the Russian army—discussions about this had been ongoing for the past several years.  

In July, President Dmitry Medvedev stated that he supported the idea of introducing military and naval chaplains ‘representing traditional Russian denominations,’ and he suggested that the appointment of chaplains should be guided by information about the ethnic and confessional composition of the units and formations.  

On November 25, Deputy Minister of Defense Nikolai Pankov officially announced the implementation of the military chaplaincy in the Russian Armed Forces starting in 2010.”

…

“Cooperation agreements continued to be concluded between religious organizations and law enforcement agencies in various regions. The Federal Bailiff Service began to engage religious figures more frequently. In June, the Director of the Federal Bailiff Service, Arthur Parfenchikov, signed a protocol of intent regarding collaboration with the Chairman of the Synodal Department of the Moscow Patriarchate for Interaction with the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement Institutions, Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov.”

Religion and secular education

As in the military, 2009 saw a significant event in the field of education, with debates ongoing for several years. In July, President Dmitry Medvedev proposed conducting an experiment in several regions of the country to teach the history of religion, the basics of secular ethics, and the fundamentals of religious culture based on one of the religions included in the “traditional four.” 

Within the framework of the course, students and their parents would be required to choose one subject from these six options to study based on their preference. It was expected that appropriate groups would be formed even if the request came from a small number of students. 

In August, the Ministry of Education and Science confirmed that the experiment would begin in 19 regions across six federal districts. Only fourth-grade classes would participate in the experiment, involving approximately 20,000 classes in 12,000 schools, equating to about 256,000 students and 44,000 teachers. The first lessons within the experiment were scheduled to begin in the spring of 2010…

2009: The Ascension of Patriarch Kirill to the Throne

Finally, 2009 marked the beginning of the reign of Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, born Vladimir Gundyayev, who has been mentioned multiple times on our site. 

On February 1, 2009, the enthronement of the newly elected patriarch took place during a liturgy at Cathedral of Christ the Saviour. The service was attended by Dmitry Medvedev and his wife; Vladimir Putin, the President of Moldova Vladimir Voronin ¹⁵, and Naina Yeltsina, the widow of Boris Yeltsin ¹⁶.

On February 2, 2009, at the Grand Kremlin Palace, President Dmitry Medvedev hosted a reception (official banquet) for the bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, during which Patriarch Kirill spoke about his vision of “symphony” as the ideal relationship between the Church and the state.

The first working meeting with a federal official, holding a state position in the Russian Federation, took place on February 12 at the working residence, with Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, Nikolai Patrushev ¹⁷.

On September 25, during a visit to Belarus, Patriarch Kirill stated in a meeting with President Alexander Lukashenko that the Church is always ready to support the strengthening and development of the union of brotherly states and to assist in the dialogue between the Belarusian leadership and Russian authorities. 

Speaking to the people from the balcony of the under-construction Church of All Saints in Minsk, he expressed his awareness of himself “as the patriarch of a people that emerged from the Kiev baptismal font,” implying that the Moscow Patriarchate does not intend to align the boundaries of its local church jurisdiction with the new state borders that emerged after the collapse of the USSR. He questioned the “reality” of the sovereignty of “many countries,” explaining that “there are many countries in the world that consider themselves sovereign, but which are not able to act, including on the international stage, fully in accordance with their national interests” ¹⁸.

Instead of conclusions

After the adoption of the “foreign agents” law in 2012 ¹⁹ and the intensified fight against extremism, the Expert Council became more frequently involved in examinations of organizations suspected of “activities against traditional values.” 

In 2016, following the update of the National Strategy for Countering Extremism, its conclusions began to be used to block missionary activities. Starting in 2017, after the ban on Jehovah’s Witnesses, the council’s role in justifying the “extremism” of non-traditional religions became even more pronounced.

Their activities in examination and monitoring of religious organizations became part of a broader policy aimed at tightening control over undesirable structures. In this context, the council’s recommendations and decisions were used to shape the regulatory framework, which, along with other measures, contributed to an intensified fight against extremism and the establishment of strict control mechanisms.

Their work and statements were utilized to justify the tightening of legislation, including laws on extremism and “foreign agents.” For example, they argued that “Western sects” (“cults”) and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) are tools of “color revolutions.”

In 2009, as soon as the controversial Expert Council of Dvorkin-Konovalov began its work, human rights defenders, religious scholars, and representatives of religious minorities organized the action “No to the Inquisition.” This protest was a preventative reaction to the establishment of the council and the concerns associated with its potential activities. The action became a symbol of resistance against religious discrimination and authoritarian tendencies in Russia.

Stay tuned for our next article, where we will explore what scientists said, whether their voices were heard, and the confrontation between religious scholars and Dvorkin’s totalitarian sect.

Sources:

1) https://babr24.com/?IDE=112188
2) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Экспертный_совет_по_проведению_государственной_религиоведческой_экспертизы_при_Министерстве_юстиции_Российской_Федерации
3) https://web.archive.org/web/20090414103300/http://www.svobodanews.ru/content/transcript/1606466.html
4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Konovalov_(politician,_born_1968)
5) https://www.patriarchia.ru/article/11424
6) https://www.patriarchia.ru/org/157
7) https://islamnews.ru/okolocerkovnyj-mehanizm-islamofobii-otkrovenie-byvshego-sotrudnika-rpc
8) https://sciup.org/istorija-i-metodologija-dejatelnosti-sodruzhestva-dialog-centrov-140294897
9) https://esango.un.org/civilsociety/showProfileDetail.do?method=showProfileDetails&profileCode=2765
10) https://vrns.ru/
11) https://iriney.ru/
12) https://yarportal.ru/topic65283s30.html
13) http://www.sclj.ru/news/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=2354
14) https://www.sova-center.ru/religion/publications/2010/03/d18233/?sphrase_id=2756220
15) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Voronin
16) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin
17) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Patrushev
18) https://web.archive.org/web/20131023061438/http://www.interfax-religion.ru/print.php?act=news&id=32222
19) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_foreign_agent_law