After 5 days in court, the deliberations of the case of the ownership of Bhoga are concluded, pending decision by the court.

Læs denne artikel på dansk

More information about Bhoga spiritual community and the Bhoga case

Upon following the testimonies and declarations from both sides, one can notice a significant phenomenon: while Natha's team has focused upon presenting it’s case for the right of ownership over the farm (Bhoga), Kim Schmock focused most of all on attacking Natha and Mihai Stoian (as the coordinating teacher) – trying to depict it as a sect. This is alike 2 people debating over what day it is: one says ‘its Wednesday’ and the other argues ‘you’re ugly’.

It should be mentioned that the judge has specifically asked that the parties will only focus upon the juridical aspect. Therefore, the team which represented Natha in this trial decided to focus only on the juridical arguments and did not mention the long list of harassments, threats and physical attacks from Kim against the Bhoga spiritual community, its individual members and against Natha. Natha has tried to keep a correct and responsible trial and avoided bringing up Kim’s violent behavior, knowing that it would damage his reputation severely. Unfortunately, Kim and his tiny group of colleagues did not share this attitude. Instead, they focused almost entirely on attacking Natha, trying to present it as a sect, hardly even approaching the actual matter of ownership of the farm. This is a very cheap strategy which shows that Kim doesn’t have good arguments. He therefore prefers simply to attack Natha since it’s much easier to destroy a reputation then it is to build one when you lack proof. The goal was obviously to play upon the innate fear that people have today of being manipulated and abused by sects – trying in this way to influence the Judge's emotional opinion upon Natha's stand.

For this purpose, Kim “produced” as witnesses 3 former members of the school who had personal grudges against Mihai Stoian. It is well known that these 3 people have over the last two years, and out of vindictiveness, been spreading lies and gossips about him and about the school in the social environment and even in the media. It is significant to note that they had absolutely no proof for any of their claims, accept for their word – thus being no more than gossip which has no place as evidence in a court of law, beyond being irrelevant to the case. In fact, should they have tried to sue Natha or Mihai for their complaints, they would certainly lose, as they had no proof and there are so many witnesses to testify to the contrary. Yet in this case, their imaginary complaints were not the subject of the trial and therefore Natha did not bother to produce witnesses to refute them. And so, the Helsingør court of law became the stage on which the good name of Natha and its members were smeared by vicious gossip invented by a tiny handful of resentful people who had nothing to add to the actual case at hand. Should Kim win the trial, it would signify the victory of prejudice and lies without proof over logic and evidence.

This strange strategy embraced by Kim's team might make one wonder: since one of the witnesses, Karsten Brask Fischer (known in Jyllands Posten and other papers as ‘Jesper’) is pretending to be an exponent of the democratic theory, how can he come with an argument like this in an ownership trial? What he tried to prove was that Natha is a sect and doesn't know a democratic way. But as an exercise of democratic thinking, what is the point in proving Natha as a sect in this ownership case? Is a sect not allowed to benefit from the justice as anyone else in a democratic system? Can a sect be cheated without problems and without juridical consequences? The logic of this kind of argument is typical to xenophobic extremists and not to people that are used with democratic rules.

Unmoved by this vicious and degrading strategy, Natha's team presented a clear-cut and common sense case, supported by sound evidence: Kim was only the front man in the buying of the farm while it was abundantly clear from the initial deal that the farm was Natha’s, Kim’s name on the papers being only a formality for the time being, until it will be transferred to Natha. Kim has made this commitment completely clear both in writing and in speech on many occasions, which dozens of people were testifying for now in the court or on their written and signed declarations. On the basis of this commitment, Natha has invested a great amount of money, and over a hundred persons – members and friends of Natha – have volunteered their services dedicating more than 20,000 working hours all for extensive renovations and improvements in the farm, increasing its value and functionality to what it is today. These people and Natha have done so only because they knew that it was belonging to Natha and the purpose of their voluntary work was to turn the farm into a spiritual community where students from Natha can live and practice spirituality together – also in large camps, guided by the teachings of Natha. Kim was involved in all these actions, and well aware of the common knowledge of the purpose of the farm and its ownership, he confirmed it on many occasions and by no means ever said anything to contradict it (until much after the work was done). Kim’s own contribution was only 130,000 kr. which he had put for the down payment.  

Going over Kim’s testimony his response to these proofs is evident: on each count he either says that he doesn’t remember (he stated this on several accounts!) or he denies it – yet Natha has presented a dozen witnesses to confirm every statement and could easily put forward dozens more, should the time of the court would have allowed it. The attentive reader will rightfully ask: how come Kim doesn't remember important moments which prove him wrong and yet he “remembers” with complete certainty that he has the right to own the farm?

What was striking in the court was also to notice the difference in attitude and quality of the witnesses. The witnesses from Natha had nothing to gain, unlike Kim, who stands to gain a profit of millions of dk crowns from selling the farm – the fruit of the work of countless people from Natha, who united for the sake of the vision of creating a spiritual community. These witnesses were relaxed regarding the possibility of winning the ownership, being motivated by affirming the principle of Justice. Of the many witnesses on behalf of Natha some were not even friends of Mihai or Natha, they were former students as well as people that were never attending any courses in Natha. On the other side we find few people that were all having a personal problem with Mihai.

Let’s have a look now at what are the arguments that Kim brings forth with the help of his 3 witnesses: Karsten Brask Fischer, Celia Clausen and Michael Eriksson – all of them former students with personal resentments against Mihai:

1.    Kim claimed that Bhoga could not belong to Natha, since, according to him, Natha could not afford owning Bhoga. This argument, beyond being irrelevant is also ridiculous, considering that Natha invested significant amounts of money in the Bhoga property – around 1,8 millions kroner in 5 years – and furthermore hold the entire economical responsibility of the place, providing all the resources for mortgage, energy consumption, maintenance and building developments (2,2 millions kroner). Beside that, active and responsible members of Natha control a foundation (Prema Fonden) which owns two significant properties in Copenhagen facilitating Natha Yogacenter and ashram community.

2.    Karsten claimed that Natha cannot own Bhoga, and no contract with it is valid, since, according to him, it did not exist legally at the time – not having legal registration. This is pure disinformation. Natha has existed as an association since 1993, registered according to law and fulfilling all the legal requirements. The proofs presented and the witness of former chairmans of the organization were very conclusive in this respect.

3.    As we have said earlier, the main argument by Kim and his handful of witness is that Natha is a sect in which all the members are manipulated by the leader and their wills are subordinated to his. Therefore even if Kim had made a commitment to Natha and its members, it was under manipulation and therefore not valid. Here the attentive reader may ask: if Kim says he didn’t make any commitment to give the farm to Natha, then how can he say that the commitment (which he claims he didn’t make) was under manipulation? Furthermore, this argument is meaningless – implying that people are free of responsibility for any of their actions, if they only claim that ‘they were influenced’. Should this argument win in court it would mean a danger to our entire society, which is based upon people assuming in a mature way responsibility over their actions. What about the enormous contribution by the many people who helped build Bhoga? Will that be taken away from them just because Kim will be relieved of his promises because he screams ‘sect! sect!’?

Moreover, accusing Natha as being a sect is a very serious accusation – which requires proof. No such proof was provided. Karsten Brask Fischer claimed to be an expert of sects and thus judges Natha as such, yet he has no expertise in the matter what so ever. We may ask – how many articles has he published about sects, if he indeed is an expert? On the other hand, the most renowned Swedish expert on sects, rev. Karl-Erik Nylund, whom the Swedish high court occasionally call upon for consul on such matters, concluded categorically that Natha is not a sect in AN OFFICIAL REPORT.

Kim and his 3 colleagues spent hours telling tales of how Natha is a sect. Yet all their inventions are easily refuted by the hundreds of members of Natha who through their own lives demonstrate the opposite. In many places even their own tales were contradicting themselves. We would not tire you with the hours that would take to refute them, one by one. We will just mention one accusation by Karsten who claimed that Mihai Stoian was abusing his influence to gain more power and enjoy the resources of the school for his own personal wealth! Anyone who knows Mihai knows that he works an average of 16 hours a day for the benefit of the school and the students, day in and day out, even weekends, and in return he is given a salary that is smaller then that of a school teacher. This accusation from Karsten is even more absurd, considering that for a long period, Mihai was living in a small damp room in the basement of the ashram Prema, while Karsten was enjoying two large rooms in the upper floor. Is this the image of a leader who creates a sect in order to abuse its members for his own profit? Those from Natha who knew Kim’s witnesses while they were in the school can tell of the irony of their accusations. These people were notorious in Natha for their fanaticism and their individual tendency towards sectarian like behavior. Karsten and Celia especially were known for on many occasions preaching to others that they should be more dedicated to the school. This was an attitude which was specific to them and was not characterizing the life of the school. They were reproached by others and were even corrected many times by Mihai, explaining that this is not fit for a spiritual school – a school which is based on the freedom inherent to each of us. Therefore, when they criticize Natha – it is themselves that they criticize, for they were the sectarians in Natha.

4.    Another claim by Kim’s accomplice’s was that the arguments provided by Natha have been falsified. Their proof to that is that, according to themselves – they were the ones who falsified them while they were still in Natha. This can be hardly considered as proof; since it is only their word and no one can confirm it (they do not even confirm each other’s statements). Celia Clausen, for example, created a situation that was surprising for all that were in that moment in the court (after Karsten Brask Fischer was performing something similar another time). At the moment of witnessing, Celia was asked by the lawyers how come she changed sides? She was the one who was responsible for running the civil case about the ownership of Bhoga and she wrote the subpoena together with Nathas lawyer, and thus to built up the defense of the Bhoga farm against Kim's attempts to steal the property from Natha. She also wrote herself a declaration with all her knowledge and experience about this case. Yet now her statements were contradicting her signed declaration. To this she explained that she was falsifying the declaration for the case to look good. When asked if she was forced to make such false documents she stated that she was not forced but she was considered responsible!!! This is a strange argument from a future lawyer. So, if one take a task and is considered responsible, then this will entitle him/her to do whatever it takes? What kind of character is using such argument? The situation is interesting also from a logical perspective: if Celia was lying in the court now it means that her previous declaration was true and now she is trying just to make things better for Kim.  If she was falsifying indeed the declaration then it means that she was lying in that situation and this already disqualifies her as reliable witness and even as a lawyer later. Yet from all her statements in the court it comes out very clear the fact that she was now lying in the court and her previous declaration was true. For instance she stated (to the big surprise of all the former friends that were present in the court) that in reality she did nothing in Bhoga but to paint half of a wall and therefore her written declaration was false. Everyone that was involved in the Bhoga project will understand why was this statement a surprise for us in the court. Lying is something bad but lying in the court and in front of your former colleagues is much worse. Considering the fact that Celia Clausen is in the fourth year in the law school, her testimony in court prove a severe lack of responsibility and even fanaticism in defending her new friend Kim with any risks.
Furthermore, why should we believe Celia and Kims other witnesses (also Michael Eriksson stated in court that he lied before), since they themselves confessed that they falsified evidence for court? So, why believe a liar? How do we know that they are not lying now? They ask us to believe that all the dozens of witnesses of Natha and the dozens more who were not allowed to testify for lack of time, were all lying, and instead we should believe them – confessed liars. If anyone can believe that argument I dare say that their judgment is hindered by prejudice.

5.     Another argument that Kim presented is what he considered as a precedent: when Natha rented a place on Købmagergade 26, which at the time was its center, the school invested effort and money into renovating the place, yet, when Natha moved out of that address, all that work was left behind. According to Kim, this precedent should be applied also for Bhoga. This is a very strange line of argumentation, since the two cases are totally different – in the case of Købmagergade 26 it was clear from the beginning that Natha is only renting the place and has no ownership over it, therefore Natha knew that all its work on renovating the place will be left behind one day, when they will move out. This was also the reason why the school paid very little rent for the place, since the renovations were considered as an investment. In Bhoga, however, the case was entirely different – there was a commitment from Kim that the farm belongs to Natha, and therefore, all the work invested into the place was done on the basis of the understanding that Natha owns the place. This is also why Natha paid all the bills and covered all the expenses. This is also showing that Natha is not going to trial for profit – otherwise it would have also went to trial over Købmagergade 26 – but is simply standing for justice.

We find 3 persons spreading lies that severely hurt the reputation and work of hundreds. One might ask, what could motivate 3 such individuals? Mikael stated himself that he is motivated by the fact that Kim has another legal case against him, one in which he might lose 100,000 kr. Therefore, Kim has the means to pressure him to comply with his agenda. As for Karsten and Celia, much can be said as to their motives, but since we do not wish here to degrade ourselves to their level of spreading malicious gossip, it would suffice to say that for a along while during their time in the school they have made serious mistakes against their fellow students, treating them badly as well as treating each other badly. Both of them being very sensitive to their image, they have tried to hide their mistakes and for a long time managed to do so, until eventually, their injuries against their colleagues and against each other exceeded themselves and were revealed by the student body. Confronted with the consequences of their own actions they decided to leave the school. It could have ended there, and friendship could have continued between them and their former colleagues. Yet, in order not to face their own mistakes, Karsten and Celia chose to throw the blame, saying that it was not their faults but everyone else’s. They turned themselves in their minds into victims – pretending that everything bad that happened to them was because of ‘the sect’ and not because of their own mistakes. Since then, they have used any opportunity to hurt Natha and their former colleagues: speaking ill of Natha in any occasion, commenting against it on the net, publicizing their fictional stories in papers and even testifying in court at any trial against Natha (The Bhoga case is not the first case to which they were lying in order to testify against Natha). Here one cannot but note that their obvious and active hostility towards Natha disqualifies them from being considered as objective and reliable witnesses. A witness biased by their own personal problems cannot be used in the court without biasing the result of the testimony. We can only hope that the judge has also noticed these elements and will consider with care these contradicting statements from the three witnesses.

The Bhoga trial is a case of formality vs reality. Kim's arguments are obviously formal while Natha's arguments are based on the reality of facts. The Judge is confronted with a difficult task since Kim Schmock has some documents on his name, yet there are plenty of witnesses which clearly prove Natha's version of the story. Today we are sometimes hiding under the shield of formalisms in order to protect ourselves from the impact Reality would have upon our soul. Yet sometime, in order to feel alive, one needs to cut out the formalisms and dare to look into reality without hesitation.  

Now the truth only needs to wait for the Judge to give the final verdict on December 14th. And so, all our eyes are turned to the Judge Morten Larsen, in wait for him to acknowledge what is obvious to all those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

On behalf of Nathas Bhoga team
Hans Hvass & Mariah Claire

| More...