Misuse of Anti-Extremism in June 2012

We publish a review of the main and most representative events related to the misuse of anti-extremist legislation in June 2012.

Creation of Laws

On June 7, 2012, a draft of the law "On Amendments to the Federal Law 'On the Protection of Children from Information Harmful to their Health and Development' and Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation" was presented in the State Duma. The bill includes in particular the creation of a single registry of domains and sites that contain information that is forbidden to distribute in Russia. In addition to sites with pornographic information or images and propaganda for drugs, psychotropic substances and suicide, the register should also include "other information found on Internet sites forbidden for distribution in the Russian Federation – on the grounds of a court decision that has come into effect on the recognition of information as forbidden for distribution." The mechanism for creating the register remains unclear, and the mechanism of its function – undeveloped. On one hand, this calls up doubts about the register’s effectiveness. On the other, this could lead to unjustified blocking of access to many sites, especially to sites that are not Russian, as their administrations are unlikely to effectively delete content on the demands of Russian law enforcement agencies (now the case of blocking YouTube could be repeated on legal grounds.) The draft law was sent for review to the State Duma Committee on Families, Women, and Children.

The federal law of the Russian Federation 65-FZ "On Amendments to the Russian Federation Criminal Code Relating to Administrative Offenses and Picketing in the Federal Law 'On Gatherings, Rallies, Demonstrations, Protests, and Pickets'" signed by the president of the Russian Federation on 8 June, 2012, officially went into effect after it was published in the "Russian Newspaper" (Rossiyskaya Gazeta) on June 9, 2012. The law does not allow those who are facing uncleared charges on a series of articles of the Criminal and Administrative Codes, including articles related to anti-extremist legislation, to participate in the organization of public activities. This limitation seems justified to us for some of these articles, but at least debatable for others. It should also be noted that a great number of wrongful sentences are made under these anti-extremist articles.

On June 25, 2012, the bill "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts in Terms of Improving the Legal Regulation of Countermeasures to Extremist Activity," developed by the Ministry of Communications of Russia, was promulgated (it may be passed if it is approved by the government.) The document provides for the amendment of some articles of the Administrative Code, the law "On Mass Media" and the law "On Countermeasures to Extremist Activities." The bill equates the placement of hyperlinks on certain material on the Internet to the spread of extremist materials, which seems to us a dangerous measure, leading to the restriction of freedom of speech. In addition, article 20.31 (implementation of extremist activity with mass media,) which imposes heavy fines on media for the dissemination of extremist materials, is to be introduced to the Administrative Code. The wording of the article repeats the wording of articles 282 and 205.2 of the Criminal Code, which creates an unacceptable situation of legal uncertainty instead of creating a "soft alternative" to criminal prosecution. Article 13.15 of the Administrative Code is proposed to add a note that responsibility for the violation of articles 20.3, 20.29 and 20.31 of the Administrative Code will treat media as legal entities. Thus, in part, it will be possible to suspend the activities of mass media for only links to extremist materials on their websites, including in the comments from readers.

A positive side of the bill is the reduction of article 20.3 of the Administrative Code (propaganda and public demonstration of Nazi attributes and symbols) so that it would only imply the cases when it comes to propaganda or justification of Nazism and fascism, and making appropriate changes to the federal law "On Countermeasures to Extremist Activity." We also welcome the proposal to remove the most odious procedures for terminating media activity for extremism from the law.

On June 20, 2012, the European Commision for Democracy through Law of the Council of Europe (Venice Commission) published its "Opinion" about the Russian Federal Law 114-FZ "On Countermeasures to Extremist Activity." The document was adopted by the 91st plenary session of the Commission on 15-16 June, 2012. The Commission recommended a number of amendments to the federal law with the goal of clarifying and modifying the definition of extremism and related terminology, as well as a number of other procedures. The main source of tyranny and abuse of anti-extremist legislation, in the Commission's view, is that offenses not involving violence or calls for violence are included in the list of extremist crimes. The overly broad and vague definition, as well as arbitrary application of the law give rise to overly stringent restrictions of fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (in particular articles 6, 9, 10, and 11) and violates the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality. In this regard, the Commission recommended that the Russian side bring its legislation in line with the European Convention on Human Rights, and offered their assistance and support in this work.

Criminal Prosecutions

In the second half of June, the Leninsky Regional Court of Vladivostok found activists Igor Popov and Alexander Kurov of the "Other Russia" movement guilty under article 280 (public appeals for the execution of extremist activity,) part 1 article 282 (incitement of social hatred) and part 1 article 282.2 (participation in extremist organizations) of the Criminal Code of the RF and sentenced them to a fine: Popov – 150 thousand rubles, Kurov – 350 thousand rubles. Popov and Kurov are accused of membership in the National Bolshevik Party, banned for extremism, as well as of inciting hatred of authorities and law enforcement. We do not consider prosecution for membership in the NBP lawful, as the ban on the party for extremism was, from our point of view, illegal. Note that the law does not define which actions should be considered a continuation of a proscribed organization, and so there are no grounds to regard the activities of the "Other Russia" as a continuation of the NBP. We lack complete data on the charges under articles 280 and 282 of the Criminal Code, but we want to emphasize that authorities and law enforcement agencies should not be considered a social group that needs special protection from anti-extremist legislation: they are protected by other articles of Russian legislation.

In early June the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation said that the military investigative department of the Investigative Committee for the Severomorsk Garrison began court proceedings on part 2 article 282.2 of the Criminal Code (participation in activities of an extremist organization) in respect to two officers of the Northern Fleet, who are suspected of involvement in the NBP activities. The officers are charged with the fact that they participated in gatherings of the Murmansk branch of the "Other Russia." For similar reasons, we believe that this is improper persecution.

Earlier in June, the investigation into the actions of the punk group Pussy Riot in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior was completed. The accused and the defense began to get familiarized with the case. At the same time, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova's lawyer published the text of the preliminary indictment handed to his client on May 28, 2012 according to which she is accused under part 2 article 213 of the Criminal Code (hooliganism committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy with religious motivations and hatred of "Orthodox believers" as a social group.) The investigator's reasoning affects the majority of religious terminology based on the shortage of proper legal considerations. The charges brought against Tolokonnikova in this document do not comply with article 14 of the Constitution, which establishes the secular nature of the state, and does not relate to the competence of the court. A part of the materials in the Pussy Riot case was isolated to a separate processing and sent to the Investigative Committee to test for the punk band members' actions relating to article 282 of the Criminal Code (inciting hatred or enmity, as well as the humiliation of human dignity.) Although the charge under article 282 cannot be filed late against Tolokonnikova, Alekhina and Samutsevish for their actions in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, as it is impossible to judge a person twice for the same act, it can be made against the same people for another action, or against other persons supporting Pussy Riot. At the end of June, the term for their arrest was extended until July 24.

Administrative Prosecutions

In the middle of the month, prosecutors in the Kursk Region reported that the magistrate court of the city of Zhelesnogorsk sentenced a local woman, Sandra Kytina, to a fine under article 20.3 part 1 of the Administrative Code (propaganda and public demonstration of Nazi symbols) for placing "images of high-level government officials in uniform with the image of the Nazi swastika and the national emblem of Nazi Germany" on her "Vkontakte" page. Recall that, from our point of view, legislation should provide punishment only for the promotion of Nazi symbols, not for any demonstration of them (to which the Ministry of Communications is also agreed.)

Prohibition of Materials for Extremism

In mid-June, it was reported that the Leninsky district court in Orenburg ruled in March on the recognition of 68 books, brochures and articles, seized during the search of Orenburg resident Asylzhan Kelmukhambetov, who was convicted in June 2011 under part 1 article 282.2 of the Criminal Code (organization of an extremist organization) for the establishment of a "Nurdzhular" cell. Among the 68 materials were books from the largest Russian publishers specialized in Islamic literature. The court forbade almost all of the materials seized during the search of Kelmukhambetov's library on the grounds that the literature is supposedly characteristic of "representatives of the 'Nurdzhular' movement," "a group that the seized library belongs to relates to the international 'Nurdzhular' movement," and the contents of the texts are aimed at "changes in the subjective reality of the individual, his values and beliefs, relationship to society, including the attempt to make a subconscious impact on the psyche and the impact on the mechanisms of belief, i.e. the formation of conscious values and beliefs on an irrational basis." Recall that we do not consider legitimate the ban on Nursi works that do not contain any extreme statements, as well as the "Nurdzhular" organization, which does not exist in Russia. Accordingly, we are against the persecution of individual believers who study the books of Nursi. However, this case is not about just the books of Nursi: other Islamic religious works are also being recognized as extremist: collections of the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad "40 Hadith" and "Gardens of the Righteous" by Imam al-Nawawi, the multivolume work of Osman Nuri Topbasha "History of the Prophets in the Light of the Holy Qur'an," a transcription of the Qur'an for children, etc. Among the forbidden books is "The Fortress of the Muslim" which was examined before and not deemed extremist. On June 25, 2012, the Public Chamber members sent a petition for relief on appeal of the court decision.

In early June, it was reported that two more Muslim works were recognized as extremist, although they do not contain, from our point of view, extreme statements: in Astrakhan, "The Call" by Nasir ibn Hamad Al-Ammar and "Friendship and Innocence in Islam" by Saleh bin Fawzaan al-Fawzaan. Both books, by court decision, are to be confiscated and destroyed.

On June 22, 2012, the Abakan City Court found issues 1073-1074 of the "Easter of the Third Rome" (Paskha Tretyego Rima) newspaper, published in Vyksa in the Nizhny Novgorod region with the blessing of defrocked bishop Diomede (Dziuban,) to be extremist materials. In 2008, the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church found the newspaper harmful to the church and divisive for Christians. At the conclusion of the examination, on the grounds of which the prosecutor brought the case to court, the specified issue of the newspaper was found to "contain information which could serve as an ideological basis for the formation of radical religious views and statements that contributed to the emergence and spread of feelings of hostility toward non-Christian religious denominations, as well as statements aimed at propaganda of superiority and inferiority of citizens on religious grounds, and attempt to create conflicts between citizens of different faiths." After reading the texts of these issues of the newspaper, we came to the conclusion that they are quite typical for the very conservative supporters of Bishop Diomede, who consider Patriarch Cyril a heretic, are distinguished by their pronunciations of anti-ecumenicalism directed primarily against Catholics, however we did not find signs of calls for enmity or incitement to violence in them.

Recognition of the above religious writings as extremist, unfortunately, fits into the existing, and lately increasingly absurd, practice of banning religious works only for the fact that their authors are convinced of the validity and uniqueness of their faith.

Meanwhile, in June the Church of Scientology in Moscow, the Control Center for the Distribution of Dianetics and Scientology, the publishing group "New Era," as well as several individuals filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR.) The complaint alleges violations of article 6 (right to a fair trial,) article 9 (freedom of conscience, thought, and religion,) article 10 (freedom of expression) and article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Scientologists appealed to the Strasbourg court after the March 2012 Moscow Regional Court confirmed the decision of the Shchelkovo City Court (Moscow Region,) who left without consideration of the applicants' appeals against the decision to institute criminal proceedings under part 1, article 282 (incitement of religious hatred) on the fact of distributing L. Ron Hubbard's books.