THE UNIFIED BUDDHIST CHURCH OF VIETNAM
THE INSTITUTE FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF THE DHARMA
October 18, 2003
The Honorable John Hanford Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom The State Department, USA
Dear Mr. Ambassador:
I learned of your visit to my country when the authorities harassed the top leaders of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam (UBCV). I also learned that you've come in the capacity of a U.S. Special Envoy entrusted with such a hard task of investigating the practice of religious freedom in Vietnam, especially Buddhism. I would like to personally submit this humble petition to Your Excellency John Hanford during your trip to Vietnam. I do not have the opportunity to have this honor; therefore, I ask our supporters to deliver my letter to you and to the world's communities for your kind support.
Your investigation would be criticized as interfering with the internal affairs of a nation. The logic of this criticism depends on the definition of religion. According to a classical meaning accepted by the Marxists in Vietnam, there exists nothing like a universal Buddhism in Vietnam, and the so-called Buddhism of Vietnam is but a social product of Vietnamese history during its development. As a result, the problem of Buddhism of Vietnam must be treated in light of materialistic dialectics; i.e. Buddhism of Vietnam must be controlled and restrained by the Communist Party over North Vietnam, more than half a century ago, and throughout Vietnam, nearly 30 years ago.
If religion is just a social form that takes shape in a particular period of time, then theoretically as well as practically, it must be ranked among other social forms such as the Association of Women, Federation of Youth, Trade Union, and the like, which group together a number of individuals who share the same worldly interest. This is the case of The Association of Buddhism of Vietnam, wrongly qualified as a Church of Buddhism of Vietnam, merely a religious Congregation of Buddhism. Nevertheless, it is the only Buddhist organization ever legally recognized in Vietnam by the authorities due to its being a member of the Fatherland Front. No wonder that the Vietnamese government keeps furiously denying any charge of its suppression of Buddhism. In that situation, any conflicts between the government and Buddhist communities are simply portrayed as clashes among members of a society, or necessary actions, which authorities try to enforce the law and security of the land; and thus, those incidents have nothing to do with the so-called violation of human rights. Whenever the question of the legal existence of the UBCV is raised, the government's response is that of an internal affair of Buddhism. We have been recommended to find a solution ourselves, as affirmed by Prime Minister Phan Van Khai to the Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang at their meeting in Hanoi last March 2003. However, just as we try to handle the problem, the authorities, evidenced by recent incidents stun the whole world, immediately repress us.
I don't think the issues mentioned above can be regarded as dispensable because the focus has been shifted to the pure theory. Actually they form a background on which the policy on Buddhism as a whole is elaborated, and the Unified Church, the only pure form of Buddhism as a religion, is banned. Lack of consideration of these issues means any investigation into the suppression of Buddhism in Vietnam is groundless.
I would like now to report briefly about the recent incidents that have surprised the world. They constitute the last ring in the chain of government crackdowns on Buddhism. I will not start from the Vietnamese Communists' first days in power, but only from the time the red fanatic partisans caused irreparable damage to Buddhism of Vietnam.
Although sustaining much pain and loss, Vietnamese Buddhists, as stated by the Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang to Prime Minister Phan Van Khai, always maintain tolerance. The Prime Minister then gave a promising affirmation that the problem of Buddhism should be settled among Buddhists themselves. Accordingly, back to his old monastery Nguyen Thieu in Binh Dinh, where he had been forced to leave for over half a century, the Most Venerable called on his colleagues to discuss peaceful ways to reorganize the Church. The first reaction of the authorities was to use an ostrich policy to prevent any response to the call. His Deputy, The Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, immediately issued a protest letter to remind the Prime Minister of his promise.
Meetings and conferences were held in the Nguyen Thieu Monastery without any considerable suppression. The outcome was an in-house ceremony to pray for the task to be carried out, and to appoint members to fill decade-old ecclesiastic vacancies. The authorities tacitly recognized the ceremony, however, its legality remains disputable, due to its unprecedented practice in the socialist legal system, although its first instance did take place in 1977 when a large conference was held in the An Quang Pagoda, also with the tacit permission. This means the UBCV legal existence was tacitly recognized on account of its traditional services.
The tension rose when the Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang decided to travel to Ho Chi Minh City, accompanied by the Most Venerable Thich Quang Do and several assistant monks. Perhaps, from a seriously wrong assessment of the situation based on false information given by secret agents, the authorities, afraid that something out of control could happen, started a campaign of harassment by first setting up obstacles with the mobilization of a handful of villagers to intercept the car as soon as it left Nguyen Thieu. Young student monks and nuns of nearby monasteries reacted instantly by forming a human shield around the car to protect their superiors. Early in the afternoon, about a thousand people in proximity broke through that security cordon, making the situation more serious. Eventually, the authorities gave up their plan. After a 10-hour hold-up, at about 3:30 PM, the car was ordered let go by the Chairman of the provincial People's Committee.
The following day, October 9, 2003, on our way to Ho Chi Minh City, a squad of police in uniform equipped with electric rod suddenly intercepted our car again at the Luong Son police outpost near Nha Trang City at about 9:30 AM. They took the car into a yard, ordered all of us to step down, and searched it thoroughly for "prohibited items" before having us scattered and searched separately.
I protested the procedure as unlawful; my belongings were impounded as evidence for some unspecified charge. All the same, I was escorted into a police car and driven southward together with Ven Thich Thanh Huyen who was from the same monastery with me. Once again, I requested to know the cause of my arrest, but got only silence. So I declared to go on a hunger strike right on the spot until my arrest was cleared, joined by Ven Thich Thanh Huyen.
At around 3:30 PM, we both were taken to the Go Vap District Police Headquarters in Ho Chi Minh City, where I was separately introduced, at about 6:00 PM, to two police officers who began the interrogation. Again, I insisted to know the cause of my arrest prior to answering any questions. The police did not respond to my request; consequently, the investigation did not go on.
Later that night, at about 10:00 PM, the policeman second in command of the district came to arrange a hearing with office of the Go Vap District People Committee and several members of the local authorities to discuss my case. I refused to move or to attend the meeting unless my lawful request to be informed of the charges of my arrest was clearly answered. Then, about an hour later, they came to meet me on the spot. Among them I could recall included the Chairman and Vice-chairwoman of the District People's Committee, the President of the District Fatherland Front, and the Deputy of the District Religion Board. I was asked for a report on my trip to Binh Dinh Province a few weeks ago. Again and again, I repeated my demand as a prerequisite for any investigation. And again, they failed to fulfill it, and thus the interrogation could not go on. At one o'clock after midnight, I was asked to follow a temporary confinement order for 12 hours without giving any specific charge.
On the next day October 10, 2003, I remained in custody. Yet, at about 3:00 PM on October 11, 2003, I was told to move somewhere else; but again, I refused to do until they used violent force to put me in a car and drove to the Nguyen Thuong Hien Secondary School, near the Quang Huong Gia Lam Monastery, my residence. Like me, Ven Thich Thanh Huyen was also carried into a classroom that was turned into a meeting room for about two dozen people, presided by the Chairman of the Go Vap District People's Committee. After the police chief of Ward I read some vague and unspecific accusations referring to several legal documents including the Decree No. 31/CP for administrative detention and Decree No. 26/1999/ND-CP for religious affairs against Ven Thich Thanh Huyen and me, the Chairman of the Go Vap District People's Committee announced the Ho Chi Minh City People's Committee's Decision to put both of us under 24-month house arrest. Obviously, as with any Communist public trials, or so-called the people's trial, mob prosecutors chimed in chorus of the mob court, and no defendant's right was recognized. After the mob trial, we were brought back to our monastery.
To defend the authorities' obvious violation of law against the world communities' criticism, the Foreign Ministry spokesman loudly declared my arrest was made because I possessed national secret materials, implying that I had committed espionage, a serious criminal charge. Of course, this is a blatant lie.
The above details are a brief description of my case, which is similar to the situation of Ven Thich Thanh Huyen who also faced 2-year house arrest. Furthermore, my assistant Ven Thich Minh Vuong, a young student monk at the Quang Huong Gia Lam Monastery, has also been repeatedly harassed since October 8. Due to forced isolation, I am not fully aware of the conditions of my two Masters The Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang and The Most Venerable Thich Quang Do as well as other colleagues and Buddhist followers; yet when a modest monastery such as the Quang Huong Gia Lam has three monks seriously oppressed, the repression campaign must be very large scale. Perhaps, it is across the entire Vietnam. Without any doubt, this time the authorities have waged a renewed massive wave of oppression against the UBCV and its leadership. Once this institution is literally and configurative destroyed, there would have no significant demand for basic freedoms in Vietnam under this dictatorial regime. Vietnam in this case would be stabilized because virtually the entire population is locked in fear and terror imposed by the authorities.
The legalistic aspect of the case may be negligible, but the matter of honor cannot be overlooked. Those selfdeclaring rulers have seriously offended the dignity of the oppressed victims like me. Indeed, for years the rulers have employed their legal system as a tool to oppress their people and then to cover up their illegal practice. Thus, this is now my turn to bring them to the court of human conscience and to the world's opinion. I appeal to the world communities for just judgments and interferences that help end the systematic violations of human rights in Vietnam in general, and in particular, end the following offenses of the Vietnamese authorities as follows:
1. The authorities of the Binh Dinh Province for their harassment by orchestrating and inciting the mob to curb a citizen's right of free movement.
2. The officials of Public Security Ministry for their abuse of power by commanding the unlawful arrest performed by the Khanh Hoa Province Police and the unlawful detention made by the Go Vap District Police.
3. The People's Committee of Ho Chi Minh City for its arbitrary decision on the administrative detention based on groundless charges.
4. The Foreign Ministry for its calumny with the intention of defaming an innocent citizen.
This report is written on the occasion of the U.S. Envoy John Hanford's visit for an investigation into the freedom of religion in Vietnam. I hope that the result of his visit will help the world communities further understand the human rights situation of this country and support the cause of Vietnamese Buddhists' struggle for their true faith.
In conclusion, we would like to express my deep gratitude to the U.S. government, and particularly to Mr. Ambassador-at-Large John Hanford for the concern about violations of free religion in Vietnam.
With respectful regards, Yours sincerely,
Thich Tue Sy
Quang Huong Gia Lam Monastery
498/11 Le Quang Dinh Street,
Go Vap District,
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam