FSB came for Telegram

31-year-old lawyer Dmitry Tretyakov from the city of Spassk-Dalniy in the Primorsky Territory was arrested for repost recording in Telegram . He is accused of public calls for extremism (Article 280 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). This is the first criminal case in Russia for repost in Telegram. And it unfolds against the backdrop of a general confrontation between Russian security forces and Telegram in Russia. Today, Roskomnadzor filed a lawsuit against Telegram blocking .

On June 12, Dmitry Tretyakov made a repost of the journalist Arkady Babchenko from his telegram channel to an open telegram group Operation Utka, where Navalny's supporters discussed the results of the anti-corruption rallies that passed throughout the country (596 people were in this open telegram group). Babchenko described his impressions of the action from the action Alexei Navalny in Moscow, criticized some steps of its organizers and proposed his version of the action of this text Tretyakov. I will now throw off an important text ... Babchenko was not on the spot, it is mainly absolutely right. ”Experts attracted by the security forces recognized this entry as a“ call to the implementation of extremist activity ”.

At the same time, the security forces officially do not officially make claims to Babchenko. After the search of March 13, Tretyakov was taken away for 228 kilometers to Vladivostok. He was offered to admit his guilt, but he refused. On March 16, the Frunze District Court sent him under the pre -trial detention center for two months in the status of a suspect. However, on March 21, the investigator issued a decision to attract Tretyakov in the status of the accused in a criminal case.

The lawyer of Open Russia Sergey Miroshnichenko told the publication "Siberia. Reals" some details of this case:

- What is said in the conclusion of the experts, in which words of this repost Tretyakov saw the "call to extremism"?

- The conclusions of experts: a text message published by a user named Dmitry contains signs of motivation in the form of a call for violent and destructive, destructive actions, protest rallies and armed struggle, resistance to the representatives of the authorities, police officers (“fight with cops”), the destruction of auto -zats (“burn autzaki”). All, these are all the conclusions of experts.

“ Did they come to such a decision on the basis of only these two phrases?”

- Yes, only on the basis of these phrases in the post. So far we do not have the materials of the criminal case in full. We were allowed to get acquainted with the materials of the criminal case that were provided to the court. But Tretyakov himself says that he did not send this post, that under the name "Dmitry", which he was charged, was hiding another person - he had another nickname and another avatar. Therefore, he denies any involvement in this crime and speaks of the possibility that he could be substituted.

- He suggests why the security forces paid attention to him?

- In all this criminal case there are not enough grounds, starting from the detention, which was unreasonable and illegal. Yes, and he himself was never judged, has a permanent place of registration, he was not an activist of the protest movement.

- How do you assess the judicial prospects of this case?

- This is an indicative case, it was necessary for the security forces to show our president and government: we work, we identify criminals with an extremist orientation. Previously, I have not heard about such criminal cases that they were started due to posts in messengers. These were mainly things when messages were distributed on social networks. I think this is an act of intimidation to show that you are under our cap, we can all, and you are nobody.

The defense filed an appeal to the decision of the Frunze District Court on the arrest of Tretyakov, but on April 3, the court upheld this decision. At the same time, the meeting at the request of the prosecutor was held closed in the presence of witnesses, which were employees of the local center for countering extremism. Miroshnichenko says that the personalities of the employees of the Center "E" did not establish during the court session, no one interrogated them.

- Describe the conditions of Tretyakov’s detention in jail?

- I don’t know about this for sure, but from my practice it follows that the camera in which it is located is not bad. It is designed for two people. He himself looks neat, neat.

- In what psychological state is your client now?

- Tretyakov is not broken, ready to fight for the truth. He hopes that the court will pass an acquittal, but he has more desire to find the truth here - because you will not achieve it in Russia - but in the European Court of Human Rights.

While Tretyakov was in custody, he wrote a letter to Arkady Babchenko and asked him for help, "at least information." “Personally, I understand that you are not calling anywhere. Just like me. Everyone who read your articles, either agree with the author’s opinion, either not, or to the ban, ” the letter says ( spelling is preserved. - SR ).

Babchenko in response called his subscribers to help the arrested.

The group "Navalny. Vladivostok team" in VKontakte announced a fee of money to pay lawyers to Tretyakov and conduct additional examinations. According to the administrators of the group, it was possible to collect a little more than 50 thousand rubles. Employees of the headquarters of Navalny In an interview with Siberia. Reali, they said that Tretyakov himself was not an activist or volunteer, but was simply a supporter of Navalny. On his Facebook page, Tretyakov shared the news about the Navalny campaign, reposted records of current events in the country, followed some resonant political affairs of the recent times: for example, Dmitry Buchenkov, who is accused of riots in Swamp Square on May 6, 2012 and in an attack on police officers, although Buchenkov himself claims that he was in the lower Novgorod.

​

You are under our cap, we can all, and you are nobody

The human rights activist of Open Russia Valentina Dekhtyarenko notes that this is not the first time that messages in Telegram are being sent for the newsletter. However, the matter for repost in this messenger is really the first. Last year, “Open Russia” wrote that against the backdrop of the case of supporters of Vyacheslav Maltsev, a criminal case was opened under the articles “Calls to the Massages” and “Calls for the implementation of terrorist activities” (part 3 Article 212, part 2 of Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). According to human rights defenders, the criminal case was opened due to the placement of files under the names of the “Revolutionary Memo” and “Russian Cuisine. ABC of Home Terrorism” in the Telegram channel of the “artillery”. Maltsev’s movement “Artillery” in Russia is recognized as extremist and prohibited.

Another criminal case was instituted due to messages in Telegram in November last year in Rostov-on-Don. Kommersant wrote that two residents of the city, Yana Sidorov and Vladasov, were accused of trying to organize mass riots, pogroms, assaults, attacks on representatives of the authorities through the chat in Telegram. Mordasov was the creator of the chat "Revolution of 5/11/17 Rostov-on-Don", and he appointed Sidorov the administrator of the chat. Some participants in the chat told Kommersant that a couple of days before the rally there were messages with a proposal to arrange a coup dignity in Rostov-on-Don, the authors proposed to storm the regional government building and take weapons with them. Mordasov and Sidorov themselves decided to reach the building of the regional government with posters “Return the Land of Pogorelians” and “Down with the Government” on November 5 and hold a picket. During the action they were detained, and later a criminal case was instituted against them. They themselves deny their guilt, claiming that they planned to hold a peaceful protest.

Tretyakov’s case, lawyer Sergey Miroshnichenko evaluates as a new round in the confrontation between the FSB and Telegram on the eve of the possible blocking of the messenger. Earlier, representatives of Telegram refused to comply with the FSB order to transfer encryption keys to the department. Telegram managers appealed to the Supreme Court and at the same time referred to the Russian Constitution, which guarantees the secret of correspondence. The Supreme Court of Russia sided with the special services.

Telegram nevertheless refused to provide the special service with encryption keys, saying that this is technically impossible. The validity of the FSB ultimatum expired on April 4. Today, Roskomnadzor filed a lawsuit to block Telegram. Now there is a court, appeal, and if all decisions are made in favor of the department, the messenger will be blocked.

"The position of Telegram remains the same: the requirements of the FSB to provide access to private correspondence of users are unconstitutional, not based on the law, technically and legally irreparable, therefore, the requirement of blocking is also unreasonably," said the head of Agora, Pavel Chikov. Human rights activists represent the interests of the messenger in disputes with Russian departments.

Lawyer of the Agora International Human Rights Affairs Vladimir Vasin comments on Tretyakov’s case as follows:

- This is the first “repost case” related to Telegram messenger. But the point here, of course, is not in Telegram itself (although this situation is perceived especially acutely due to attempts by the authorities to block it in Russia). The mechanism for identifying an offense and collecting evidence here is exactly the same as in any social network, any other messenger (after all, this is all the telecommunication Internet, as noted in the relevant articles of the Criminal Code).

We will get a new arbitrary way to create criminal cases where they should not be

The group in which repost was made, open, consists of about 600 participants. Most likely, among them they found those who considered the posted post extremist and gave appropriate evidence. Further, the scheme is obvious: evidence - inspection of a mobile device, the surname of the author of repost, at the maximum - the definition of the IP from which the publication was made. All, evidence is collected - the operatives think.

Another moment is noteworthy: a person was immediately arrested for two months under an article, the maximum punishment of which is 5 years in prison, that is, formally we are talking about a crime of moderate severity. If Tretyakov was not convicted earlier, it was not hidden from the investigation, then such a preventive measure ... This is too tough. And this trend-to tighten the punishment and preventive measures in such criminal articles-is observed over the past two to three years and only intensifies.

I want to emphasize: I am against extremism, as well as against extremist publications and calls for illegal actions. But the process of proof in any case should be objective, and the evidence is permissible, collected by legal methods that exclude falsification and abuse by law enforcement agencies, especially for similar articles. Otherwise, we will get a new arbitrary way to create criminal cases where they should not be.