Extremists are all around

The independent press center hosted a presentation of two reports from the SOVA Information and Analytical Center on the events of 2008: “Problems in the implementation of freedom of conscience” and “Illegal application of anti-extremist legislation.” Alexander Verkhovsky (SOVA Center), Galina Kozhevnikova (SOVA Center) and Dmitry Dubrovsky (Smolny Institute of Liberal Arts and Sciences, St. Petersburg) spoke at the presentation. All information underlying the reports was collected during monitoring by the SOVA Center itself and is presented on its website .

In general, 2008 did not bring significant changes compared to the previous year. Is it possible that the state is more willing to participate in the anti-sectarian activities of the Russian Orthodox Church, thereby creating among citizens the impression that the government encourages interreligious debates. Meanwhile, interreligious disputes are a private matter of confessions, and the authorities have no reason to get involved in these disputes. One can also see other signs of the decomposition of the secularism of the state: for example, the development of a trend of legal prosecution for blasphemy as extremism, the strengthening of the demonstrably non-secular nature of the regime in Chechnya and the increase in cases of successful attacks by church organizations on some others - remember the story of the Ryazan Kremlin. Another alarming symptom is that in 2008 there were more cases involving arson and the use of explosives: 36 versus 27 in 2007. If previously offensive messages were written on the walls of Protestant houses of worship, now they prefer to throw Molotov cocktails at them. There are also curious cases: for example, the ban on several texts of the Falun Gong movement as inciting hostility towards the Chinese authorities. That is, if you follow the letter of the law, the social group protected in this case is the PRC government.

In 2008, there was a clear trend of pressure on the media - Rosokhrankultura or prosecutorial supervisory authorities generously send warnings to the media (Rosokhrankultura sent out 27 warnings in 2008) if they contain texts that criticize law enforcement agencies (this is especially noticeable in the North Caucasus). Sometimes the media come under fire for quoting on their pages someone’s statements that the same law enforcement agencies did not like: such a case happened with the St. Petersburg “Novaya Gazeta”, which cited the statement of one of the DPNI members who expressed their readiness to fight the Georgians. This does not always end with the closure of the media, the speakers noted, but many begin to engage in self-censorship and close their forums.

In general, there is a general expansion of enforcement of anti-extremist laws. In Novosibirsk, for example, a designer who reconstructed a German wartime tank and recreated the Wehrmacht emblem on the armor was accused of extremism. The list of prohibited extremist literature has grown fourfold: to 344 titles. However, it remains unclear how and from what point to implement a ban on access to this literature: libraries, for example, do not have the right not to issue books that are stored in their collections. In addition, there is no mechanism for removing a work from the list - meanwhile, some names have been challenged in court and have already been recognized as non-extremist.

Dmitry Dubrovsky, director of the Human Rights program, shared information about how the examination for extremism is carried out. According to him, the investigation serves a specific order: it is necessary to either convict or acquit, and in accordance with this, an examination is carried out, for which no clear criteria have been formulated. Therefore, any uncomplimentary mention of power can be considered extremism. The Internet has recently also come under the laws written for the media, and any author on any forum can be held accountable. Nevertheless, the authorities are greatly irritated by the fact that not all experts give the opinions that are required. Attempts are being made to strictly license expert activities, and some experts find it increasingly difficult to participate in official expertise.