Putting is not a shame

Linguists have refused their own involvement in dubious expertise

The investigation of the criminal case on the fact of public insult of President Putin in the news report of the television company TV-6-Vladimir continues for the third month. (See the material “Puting is a shame” in No. 5 of January 24, 2008) On the eve of the parliamentary...

The investigation of the criminal case on the fact of public insult of President Putin in the news report of the television company TV-6-Vladimir continues for the third month. (See the material “Puting is a shame” in No. 5 of 01/24/2008)

On the eve of the parliamentary elections, a report was aired about the rally of Vladimir United Russia, in which the TV presenter called the party "Puting" and its participants "true Putinites." State Duma deputy from United Russia Mikhail Babich was offended for the president. In addition, he saw a humiliation of national dignity in the demonstration of dances of the artists invited to the rally against the background of the speeches of the Duma member A. Isaev (the artists danced in costumes of different nationalities, and the deputy shouted about the enemies of Russia and about the scum jacking at foreign embassies).

According to Babich, the Department for Particularly Important Cases of the Investigative Committee under the Prosecutor's Office of the Vladimir Region urgently sent the narration text for examination to the Nizhny Novgorod Linguistic Institute. As it was later explained to journalists, the conclusion of Mikhail Grachev, a well-known linguist in scientific circles, received at the end of December became the basis for initiating a criminal case for insulting an official under Art. 319 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. For the application of another article of the Criminal Code - for inciting ethnic hatred, as demanded by United Russia M. Babich, sufficient arguments were not found.

At the stage of pre-trial investigation, curious details came to light. Back in January, the investigation turned to the Russian Guild of Linguists-Experts in Documentation and Information Disputes (GLADIS) with a request to conduct an examination of the scandalous TV report. The conclusions of the experts were unequivocal: the presented material does not contain insults to anyone. For some reason, the Vladimir investigator did not accept this conclusion.

Interested in this turn of events, GLADIS linguists decided to read the written opinion of a colleague from the Nizhny Novgorod Linguistic Institute. And then it turned out that in that first study, the summary was similar. And Mikhail Grachev himself is terribly indignant that his judgments have been perverted. Natalia Novozhilova, Vladimir