A completely fabricated claim has been circulating for a long time, alleging that in 1995 the High Court of Paris handed down a supposedly “historic verdict” against the Serbian Orthodox Church
(Source)
The Truth About the 1995 Paris Trial
A completely fabricated claim has been circulating on social media and certain portals for a long time, alleging that in 1995 the High Court of Paris (Tribunal de grande instance de Paris) handed down a supposedly “historic verdict” against the Serbian Orthodox Church (SOC). According to this harmful narrative, after the SOC sued the French newspapers Le Monde, Le Figaro, and Libération for malicious articles, the court dismissed the lawsuit – a fact that certain circles now falsely portray as “the first case in Europe where a court confirmed a church’s complicity in genocide.”
Although a defamation (diffamation) trial did take place in Paris in the mid-1990s, the conclusion that the court “convicted the SOC of genocide” is an absolute lie, a legal absurdity, and a fundamental falsification of French law.
During the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, certain French media outlets published one-sided reports regarding the role of the SOC, prompting church dignitaries to initiate a defamation lawsuit to protect the institution’s reputation. During the proceedings, French Slavist Paul Garde, historian Ivan Đurić, and Bishop Atanasije Jevtić testified. Ultimately, the French court dismissed the SOC’s claim (débouté de sa demande) strictly on procedural and legal grounds pertaining to press freedom.
Why the „Genocide Conviction“ Claim is a Pure Hoax
To debunk this persistent disinformation, one must understand that the French court handling media disputes applies exclusively the Press Freedom Act of 1881 (Loi du 29 juillet 1881 sur la liberté de la presse).
Under no circumstances did the French civil court try the SOC for war crimes (crimes de guerre), nor did it possess the jurisdiction to do so. The court solely evaluated whether the journalists formally satisfied the conditions of journalistic “good faith” (l’exception de bonne foi), which in French law rests on four technical criteria:
- Legitimacy of purpose(Légitimité du but poursuivi) – reporting on matters of public interest.
- Absence of personal animosity(Absence d’animosité personnelle) – by the journalist toward the plaintiff.
- Thoroughness of the investigation(Sérieux de l’enquête) – conducting field research and formally citing sources.
- Prudence and moderation in expression(Prudence et mesure dans l’expression).
The judgment exclusively confirmed that, from a formal legal standpoint, the journalists acted within the bounds of legally protected press freedom. However, the French civil court has neither the jurisdiction nor the mandate – and has never issued any criminal ruling – convicting the Serbian Orthodox Church of genocide (génocide).
What is most disastrous and scandalous about this entire case is the fact that such a monstrous manipulation continues to be publicly disseminated to this very day – with absolute impunity and zero accountability. This serves as terrifying proof of just how deeply rooted the shameless practice of systematically attributing lies and disinformation to the Serbian Orthodox Church has become.
A judicial ruling whose substance and operative part pertained strictly to procedural matters and the freedom of journalistic expression has, for decades, been brazenly distorted, falsified, and repackaged in the media into an alleged, established “conviction for genocide.” Such a malicious inversion of reality represents a textbook example of journalistic dishonor, a classic legal forgery, and a deliberate attempt to permanently damage the reputation of the Serbian Orthodox Church through disinformation.
On the Beheading of the Holy Prophet, Forerunner and Baptist of the Lord, Saint John, September 11 / August 29, AD 2026.
Protopriest-Stavrophor Miroljub Srb. Ružić