There is an organization called FECRIS — an international body dedicated to combating cults, which receives significant financial support from French taxpayers. Despite its declared good intentions, the organization has been criticized by scholars and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) for its discriminatory attitude towards groups it labels as “cults.”
On its official website, FECRIS claims to be apolitical. But is this really the case? A closer look reveals that the organization and its affiliates, as well as active participants in FECRIS conferences, often express strong political opinions.
Political Connections and Statements
One example is Khaled Slougui, who not only regularly participates in FECRIS events and conferences but also joined the Board of Directors of GEMPPI, the French branch of FECRIS, in 2018. Despite FECRIS being funded by the French state, Slougui does not hesitate to openly express his opposition to French policy and even labels President Macron a “cultist.”
Here are some examples of his tweets:
– “I just listened to Éric Zemmour on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict… American provocations are unbearable… Therefore, France should leave the joint command.”
– “A unipolar world is the greatest danger to humanity. Putin, as a perceptive strategist, is doing something about it, and great Russia is returning to a multipolar world. Everything else is just sterile agitation… It would be better if NATO disappeared.”
Such political statements from representatives of anti-cult organizations are surprising and raise questions.
FECRIS Congresses and Their True Agenda
In one of his tweets, posted during a FECRIS congress in Brussels, Slougui shared his participation in the event and simultaneously expressed his opinion about Macron’s “cultist spirit.” These statements, in the context of an anti-cult conference, raise the question: what topics are really being discussed at FECRIS congresses and which “cults” are they truly fighting against?
Political Doubts
The statements and actions of members like Khaled Slougui lead to questions about whether FECRIS and its participants are genuinely apolitical. It is evident that, under the guise of fighting cults, these organizations can label inconvenient individuals and groups as cultists, going far beyond religious activities and serving as a tool for political struggle.
Impact on Democracy
The funding of FECRIS by the French state raises questions about the appropriateness of using public funds. President Macron and the French government should pay attention to which organizations receive state money and how this can affect social and political processes.
Conclusion
Although FECRIS claims to have an anti-cult mission, an analysis of its activities and the statements of participants like Khaled Slougui reveals a different picture. The politicization and engagement of the organization cast doubt on its true goals and raise questions about its impact on democratic institutions. It is important to closely monitor the activities of such structures to prevent possible misuse of resources and the subversion of democratic values.
The French government needs to carefully review the funding of FECRIS and other similar organizations to ensure they are truly committed to their stated goals and to avoid potential threats to democracy and public order.
More information about FECRIS activities can be found in the article Why do Anti-cult organizations Pose a Threat to Diplomatic Relations and Human rights?
