First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
Ark. high court: Judge didn't overstep by organizing temple election

By The Associated Press
03.07.08

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — A judge did not violate the U.S. Constitution by deciding which members of a Fort Smith Buddhist temple could vote in a 2006 election over the group's leadership, the state’s highest court ruled yesterday.

The Arkansas Supreme Court upheld the vote for the board of directors of the Wat Buddha Samakitham and rejected the argument of the temple's former abbot and members who said a judge overstepped his bounds in the election.

Circuit Judge James Marschewski had ruled in a dispute within the group that the temple's 1989 bylaws were valid and he ordered the election to pick a new seven-member board. In that process, special master Brad Jesson determined who would be candidates and developed a voter roll with 1,200 temple members.

In a unanimous decision, the justices rejected the argument of former Abbot Phra Sangob Parisanto and 11 others who said Marschewski may have disenfranchised as many as 400 members.

"It is apparent to this court that in determining that an election was required under the 1989 bylaws and in supervising that election when the temple members proved incapable of conducting it on their own, the circuit court and its special master did not delve into matters that were essentially religious in nature, but rather applied neutral principles of law concerning election procedures," Justice Robert L. Brown wrote in Viravonga v. Buddha Samakitham.

After the 2006 election, Parisanto and nine other monks were fired from the temple. Forty-one members of the temple also were ejected. The temple's directors said clarification was needed on who could vote in the election because the bylaws did not spell it out.

The dispute stemmed from a lawsuit filed by some temple members in 2005 against the abbot and several other temple members. The suit accused the defendants of trying to wrest control of the temple from the elected board in violation of the temple's 1989 bylaws.

Parisanto and 11 others filed a countersuit, claiming the plaintiffs in the original suit were violating 1992 bylaws that superseded the 1989 bylaws.

The Sebastian County Election Commission agreed in 2006 to rent two voting machines for use in the temple's election.


Related

N.Y. high court decides it can't rule on religious elections

'The First Amendment forbids civil courts from interfering in or determining religious disputes,' majority decides in case involving ultra-Orthodox Jewish sect. 11.25.07

Buddhists lose bid to build temple in Conn.
State high court rejects claim that town of Newtown violated federal religious-freedom law when it denied permit for building. 01.31.08

News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.

print this   Print


Last system update: Sunday, January 25, 2009 | 06:51:20
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

First Reports
Supreme Court
Experts
Columnists
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Sings™
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links