Misuse of Anti-Extremism in February 2012

Prosecution

In mid-February, two rulings in Bashkiria sentenced a number of individuals under Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code, organization of an extremist organization, over their membership in the banned Islamic organization Hizb ut-Tahrir. Six were sent to prison, while four received suspended sentences.

During the same period, we became aware of a case filed in the Kaliningrad Region under Part 1 of Article 282.2 against followers of the theologian Said Nursi, who Russian authorities allege make up the nonexistent organization Nurcular.

At the end of the month another case was filed, under Part 2 of Article 213 of the Criminal Code – hooliganism committed by a group of persons by prior agreement –against the punk-protest group Pussy Riot after they demonstrated in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in central Moscow. The qualification of the case under Article 213 is dubious at best, as there were no weapons involved in the incident nor any sign that it was motivated by hatred towards any particular religious group. It is Sova’s position that Part 2 of Article 5.26 of the Administrative Code – insulting the religious sensibilities of citizens or the desecration of venerated objects, symbols and emblems or ideological symbols – would be more appropriate.

In the Murmansk Region, proceedings were initiated under Part 1 of Article 282, incitement to national or social hatred. We believe the prosecution is not fully justified, as the case deals with national hatred and that against police officers. Sova has noted time and again that the police do not constitute a social group requiring special protection, as they are extra protected by the other articles of Russian legislation.

In late February we learned that prosecutors have not confirmed a decision to throw out a case against activists of the art-protest group Voina, Oleg Vorotnikov and Leonid Nikolaev, under section “b” of Part 1 of Article 213 of the Criminal Code, instead returning it to an investigative committee. Nikolaev and Vorotnikov are accused of hooliganism motivated by hatred against a social group – the police – due to their “Palace Coup” action. The case has already been dropped twice.

We also note the dismissal of a case against Evening Tyumen editor Vladimir Yefimov, who was charged under section “b” of Part 2 of Article 282 – incitement to hatred through abuse of office – for initiating hostility or hatred against the police.

Prohibition of materials for extremism

Tver prosecutors filed a suit protesting the recognition of a Jehovah’s Witnesses children’s book about Jesus Christ, entitled Learn from the Great Teacher, as extremist.

The Kaluga Regional Court upheld a decision of the Zhukovsky District Court of Tarusa that deemed Alexander Savko’s Sermon on the Mount as extremist. The painting is from a series entitled The Journey of Mickey Mouse in the History of Art, and shows Mickey Mouse in the stead of a preaching Christ. An online image of the painting at zdravomyslie.ru was also deemed extremist.

Police activity

February saw several incidents giving rise to legitimate suspicions that employees of the Interior Ministry’s Centers to Combat Extremism (known colloquially as Center E) are engaged in illegal activities.

Memorial member and activist Philip Kostenko was attacked on the eve of the February 4 rally For Fair Elections in Saint Petersburg. Having sustained serious injuries, Kostenko said his assailants were unknown to him, but that they could have been from Center E as the body’s employees had threatened him on numerous occasions. An anti-fascist activist who helped organize a Petersburg rally in support of Kostenko also received threats over phone and e-mail.

Following the February 4 rally For Fair Elections in Nizhny Novgorod, United Front activist Nikolai Nikolaev (who had been involved in organizing the event) was kidnapped and beaten. Nikolaev and local civic activists identified his attackers as employees of Center E, including a police major.

At the end of the month, January detention of Anton Rykov, a lawyer from the Committee against Torture, on suspicion of distributing extremist materials was deemed illegal by Nizhny Novgorod prosecutor’s office.

Employees of the Ryazan branch of Center E paid a local university rector a visit to demand the expulsion of Alexander Samokhin, a student who participated in the city’s rally For Fair Elections as head of one of the city’s nationalist organizations.

The Tatarstan multinational movement Consent issued a statement claiming that the local Center E branch had created a list of local ‘extremists,’ which included organizers of the local demonstration For Fair Elections. The list also included well-known local sociologists, political scientists and social activists. Center E used unsurprising informal methods of obtaining information about those included in the list, such as inquiries into their financial statuses and tax practices. We remind readers that the European Court of Human Rights’ decision in Shimvolos vs. the Russian Federation dictates that the compilation of such lists, formed under regulations inaccessible to citizens and without the opportunity to appeal, infringes on the basic right to privacy.

In Petrozavodsk and Podolsk, print runs of reports were seized under the pretext that they were being “checked for extremism.” In both cities the report in question is entitled Putin. Corruption, while in Podolsk the circulation of another report, Putin. Results. 10 years was also seized. We remind readers that both reports had already been seized for the same reason, with no signs of extremism identified. More importantly, authorities hardly need to confiscate several thousand copies of a publication for such a “check.”