Misuse of Anti-Extremism Legislation in October 2011

October 2011 was marked on the one hand by a large number of wrongful criminal cases and improper bans, and on the other by the laudable termination of criminal proceedings against the Voina art group and the lifting of a ban on a painting depicting Mickey Mouse as Jesus Christ.

Criminal Prosecution

This month we became aware of six cases as charges were initiated, and one improper sentence. The guilty verdict was issued against a Nizhny Novgorod group accused of organizing and participating in activities related to Nurdzhular, which has been banned as an extremist organization. The defendants received terms varying from probation to a year in prison.

The charge against Nurdzhular for organizing extremist activities is also relevant to a Novosibirsk case against Ilkhom Merazhov and Kamil Odilov; Merazhov has fallen victim to a defamation campaign by regional and federal media. Neither the ban on Said Nursi's books, or the organization Nurdzhular - which does not exist - was justified.

Moreover, we believe the pursuit of Ilkhom Merazhov under Article 282.2 Part 1 (the organization of an extremist group) of the Criminal Code is actually punishment for his active social position. He is an imam, an Associate Professor of Mathematics at the Siberian University of Consumer Cooperatives, and has acted as a public defender at trials against Krasnoyarsk Muslims accused of reading Said Nursi's books. Nursi's books in the original Turkish, which were seized during a search on Merazhov, are not included in the Federal List of Prohibited Materials – only the translations to Russian are.

We would like to draw readers' attention to yet another wrongfully initiated case or, more specifically, the incorrect classification of charges in question as extremist. The case concerns Alexander Lebedev, a deputy of the Slobodskaya District Duma of the Kirov Region; Lebedev also owns the National Reserve Corporation. He is charged under paragraph "b" of Part 1 of Article 213 of the Criminal Code (hooliganism motivated by hate) after throwing a punch at well-known entrepreneur Sergei Polonsky on live television.

It is unclear to us how one rich Russian can exact social (or political, or ideological) hatred on another, especially when neither individual belongs to any fringe party or movement. Further, the mere presence of the article concerning hate-motivated hooliganism raises serious questions: the nature of a hooliganism crime, according to its definition, is the commitment of public disorder for the mere sake of committing public disorder. Concerning hooliganism offenses, as we have mentioned in the past, the hate motive should be removed from Article 213 of the Criminal Code.

We also wrote about this in connection with the November 2010 case against Oleg Vorotnikov and Leonid Nikolaev in St. Petersburg. They were prosecuted under this article as a result of their art-protest, "Palace Coup." Our issue with this matter is not restricted simply to the shortcomings of the Criminal Code mentioned above, but extends to the very essence of the charges: investigators allege that Vorotnikov and Nikolaev acted for reasons of social hatred towards the police. We are pleased however to announce that common sense prevailed and the investigator closed the case for both activists, guided by expert opinion and the instructions of the Resolution of the Plenum Forces № 11 "On judicial practice in criminal cases involving crimes of an extremist nature" of 28 June 2011.

Prohibition of materials for extremism

In October we noted the enactment of one unlawful ban, and the abolition of another.

The Pervomaysky District Court in Krasnodar granted prosecutors permission to ban materials of the spiritual practice Falun Dafa for extremism. One of the materials is the seminal book "Zhuan Falun," and the other three are human rights and informational materials. The trial lasted intermittently for two years. Judicial experts found no signs of extremism in the materials, except for the use of the swastika, which according to experts is similar to and easily confused with the Nazi symbol but does not promote Nazism. We submit that the ban on these materials is improper.

This is not the first case to ban Falun Dafa materials. Earlier the same court had deemed them extremist, but the decision never came into effect due to cancellation by a higher court.

Another decision, which we welcome, is the lifting of a ban of Alexander Savko’s "Sermon on the Mount" picture, one of the pieces of his "Mickey Mouse’s Journey through the History of Art." The case was directed to a new trial in the same Zhukovsky District Court in the Kaluga Region. In the new trial, the artist will have the opportunity to defend his work before prosecutors; the first trial took place in his absence. We remind readers that we believe the ban was illegal – though the works could be considered insulting to believers (and in fact the charge was reduced to this), this does not constitute extremism according to Russian law.