Evangelical Christian representatives said religious organizations often encountered barriers to registration. They noted legal representatives were required to travel to the capital, Quito, to register rather than being able to register in their local communities. An evangelical Christian leader said administrative costs, delays in processing, and demands by some officials for the payment of bribes created additional obstacles to registration of several of the churches. He said the slow process and delays led many groups not to apply for registration. Without a legal representative, groups were unable to open bank accounts or engage in formal land transactions. According to evangelical Christian representatives, unregistered groups often met in private homes or ad hoc structures on the private land of a group member.
The MOJ provided training to religious groups to help them navigate the registration process. According to the ministry, roughly 4,000 religious groups operated in the country, although only half were actually registered with the government. The MOJ provided no public information on specific groups that were denied registration or the reasons for their denial.
As of the end of the year, a case filed by the Jehovah’s Witnesses and accepted for review in September 2014 remained pending before the constitutional court. The case involved a conflict in the northern town of Iluman between Jehovah’s Witnesses who wanted to build a new assembly hall and indigenous residents who opposed it. Two lower courts had previously ruled in favor of the residents, concluding that their right to self-determination was a valid rationale for preventing the practice of religion. Representatives of the Jehovah’s Witnesses said they hoped to set a legal precedent with the case, which they said would establish that an indigenous community’s constitutional right to self-determination could not violate individuals’ right to practice freely the religion they chose. The Jehovah’s Witnesses said they requested information from the MOJ but did not receive explanation for why the case was pending more than two years after it was accepted for review by the constitutional court.
Catholic, Jewish, and Seventh-day Adventist representatives stated the government’s standard academic calendar, which applied to private and public schools, made it difficult for some schools to observe their religious holidays. Catholic representatives said religious schools received scrutiny from the government. Whereas public schools and nonreligious private schools were under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education only, both the Ministry of Education and the MOJ conducted visits to religiously affiliated schools and reviewed their curricula. Some religious leaders stated regulatory burdens made it extremely difficult to run a private religious school. An evangelical Christian leader said that in the past five years the government increased technology requirements for schools to maintain accreditation. He stated private schools, including religiously affiliated schools, were held to a higher standard than public schools. For example, he said public schools either were given the resources to comply with regulations or were given relaxed treatment on inspections regardless of compliance. Some private and religious schools were shut down for not complying with the technology standard.
In September the MOJ sanctioned the director and chief of security of the Quito Provisional Detention Center for allowing the use of an official stamp with a Nazi swastika for visitors entering the facility. The MOJ condemned the use of any offensive symbol that could compromise human rights. According to media reports, the Office of the Public Defender reported the use of the stamp in July 2015. In September the media reported on criticism by Public Defender Ernesto Pazmino about the delay in the government’s response and questioned why the stamp was permitted for so long.
Representatives of the Catholic Church stated they collaborated with government institutions on social assistance projects, particularly in coastal regions devastated by an earthquake on April 16. They said the government imposed restrictions on religious groups’ social welfare activities in which the government was active. Leaders of other religious groups said they did not seek government funding for social welfare projects either because of internal policies averse to government involvement or to avoid conditions the government might place on them. After the earthquake, some religious groups stated the government required all disaster relief assistance to be channeled through the military. Despite this policy, many religious groups distributed disaster assistance through their own networks.