Translated material
The censorship past and modern punitive censorship of religious teachings
We bring to your attention article by Aidar Sultanov, first published in the journal "Lawyer" No. 7, 2012. Published with the consent of the author.
"The higher the to understand a man of God, the better he will know him. And the better he will know god, the more will approach him, imitate his goodness, mercy and love for people. Therefore, let him who sees all the light of the sun, filling the world, let it not condemn or despise that superstitious man, who sees in his idol only one ray of the same light, let him not despise and that unbeliever who is blind and does not see the light at all. L.N. Tolstoy "Surat Coffee House" [1]
We allowed themselves to begin the article with a quote from a work that was not allowed publish for censorship [2] reasons. A short work of amazing power aimed at religious tolerance and increased respect for other people who profess different religion was banned for a long time.
Undoubtedly, the modern reader, having read the "Surat Coffee House", will be in great difficulty regarding the reasons for such a ban, since this article does not contain any calls for violent action and no insults to anyone's religious convictions and beliefs. We will not torment you - the St. Petersburg censorship committee recommended not allow it to be printed, since "the main idea of the story is that all faiths - and Mohammedan, and Jewish, and Christian - are equally pleasing to God, and the best temple is the universe. Misunderstood and misunderstood, this work can serve as a tool for successful propaganda among commoners various rationalistic teachings, which, of course, is highly undesirable" [3] .
So, the reason for censorship was not the work itself, but the fear that it would be bad understood and interpreted. To be more precise, it is the censor's fear based on assumption that there are people who, unlike him, are not intelligent enough, to understand the intention of the author and who can understand the work badly and incorrectly interpret.
However, in fact it is the censor's fear of badly and misinterpreting the work, aimed at love and respect as dangerous.
Censorship has always been a tool against dissent, punishing the way of thinking. Moreover, as Bernard Shaw noted - "murder is the extreme degree of censorship." Socrates, Jesus Christos, Jan Hus and many others were killed precisely because of censorship considerations [4] .
A.N. Radishchev in his book "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" dedicated whole chapter of the history of censorship, convincingly showing the failure of its destination. In particular, he wrote “Censorship is made by the nurse of reason, wit, imagination, everything great and elegant. But where are the nannies, then it follows that there are guys who walk on the harness, which often causes crooked legs; where there are guardians, it follows that there are juvenile, immature minds, which by themselves they cannot rule. If, however, there are always nannies and guardians, then the child will he will walk on a harness, and perfect in age he will be a cripple” [5] .
Book “didn’t like” the empress and the fate of Radishchev was decided in advance: he was found guilty in the very decree on bringing him to justice ... To the author of the book "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" was threatened with the death penalty, to which he was sentenced in 1790. He was found guilty of a crime oaths and positions of a subject, the publication of a book "filled with the most harmful philosophies, destroying public peace, detracting from the due respect for the authorities, striving to produce indignation among the people against bosses and bosses and, finally, insulting and violent expressions against the dignity and power of the king. "A month and 11 days after sentencing the death penalty was replaced by a 10 year link. Radishchev A.N. was released in 1796 and amnestied in 1801.
However, amnesty for Radishchev did not mean that the authorities agreed with his ideas about the absence the need for censorship. Censorship three years after his amnesty received detailed legal regulation - on July 9, 1804, the Charter on Censored. According to this Statute, censorship has a duty to consider all kinds of books and writings assigned for public use. Main the object of this consideration is to deliver books and writings to society, conducive to the true enlightenment of the mind and the formation of morals, and to remove books and writings contrary to this intention.
Necessary note that this censorship charter is considered by specialists in the Russian censorship the most liberal. So if "if the Censor, in the manuscript delivered to him will find some places that are contrary to what was indicated in the previous paragraph 15 prescription, it does not by itself make any amendments to them; but meaning places, sends the manuscript to the publisher, so that he himself changes or excludes them. Upon the return of the manuscript so corrected, the Censor approves it to printing” (clause 16 of the Charter) [6] .
Not less significant was paragraph 21. of the Charter, in which the Censor was bound by necessity proceed from the conscientiousness of the author in the presence of various interpretations censored text "... Censorship, in the prohibition of printing, or skipping books and writings, is guided by prudent indulgence, moving away from any biased interpretation of works or passages thereof, which, for any for ostensible reasons seem to be prohibited. When the place exposed doubt, has a double meaning, in which case it is better to interpret it in the most beneficial way for the writer [7] , rather than pursue him" [8] .
However, subsequently, both the second (1826) and the third censorship charters (1828) were adopted, which all tightened and tightened censorship, and the practice of subsequent years remained in history, as a practice of the era of censorship terror [9] .
At Alexander II saw some improvements in the position of the press as a result of censorship reforms [10] . On April 6, 1865, a decree was issued "On the granting of certain reliefs and conveniences of the domestic press" [11] . Some publications were exempted from prior censorship, but there was introduced, together with liability in court, a system of administrative penalties: the Minister of the Interior was given the right to make newspapers and magazines exempted from censorship, in case of harmful directions, warnings, and the third warning entailed suspension of publication. This system, in comparison with judicial responsibility, is practice has gained a predominant importance [12] . This responsibility, according to the rules of 1865 g., in accordance with the general principles of punitive censorship, i.e. e. for the confiscation of the book, in the case of the abuse seen in it, the guilty the person is brought to trial according to the rules expressed in the statute on the press [13] .
Reform 1865 did not introduce indulgences for spiritual literature. Literature spiritual content was still subject to review by the committees of the internal spiritual censorship on the basis of special and, moreover, stricter rules than decrees on secular censorship - “Not only works, directly opposed to the principles of Christianity, its dogmas, the foundations of the state devices, etc., but she does not approve of the publication of "large essays or small, with great shortcomings in the solidity of thoughts, purity Christian feelings, kindness of style, clarity and correctness of presentation.
TO consideration of spiritual censorship [14] were subject to books of proper spiritual content and essays related to morality, but containing places of a completely spiritual content [15] . Spiritual censorship claims to censor even non-religious the contents were significant - it is a widely known fact that Metropolitan Filaret complained to Benckendorff about the words from "Eugene Onegin" "offending the shrine": "... and flocks of jackdaws on crosses." The censor, who was called to account on this occasion, said that, as he knew, jackdaws did indeed sit on the crosses of Moscow churches and what, in his opinion, is the fault of the Moscow a police chief who admits this, not a poet and a censor.
Not surprisingly, spiritual censorship banned the works of L. N. Tolstoy containing in itself criticism of the Orthodox Church [16] . The possibility of a "bad" interpretation became the basis for censorship through non-public circulars of the censorship department. Confidential and non-confidential circular orders had a great influence on censorship practice [17] .
Reform 1865 was inconsistent and was soon nullified by various amendments [18] . In particular, the introduction of administrative practices that circumvent judicial proceedings. In 1868 Minister of the Interior Count P.A. Valuev, justified the introduction of administrative practice, since “ the range of actions of the judiciary, for all its meaning, limited or predetermined by the subjects of her department. Circle of Action presses is comprehensive. There is no question that she could not touch legally with impunity, subject to certain forms, with the help of known reservations or omissions and with some confidence in the ingenuity of readers ... The court has no right to guess " [19] . Administrative censorship practice could "guess" and, moreover, must was to guess about the possible interpretations and understandings of the works ...
Baron M.N. Korf wrote “As in serfdom by centuries of habit to it, many saw the basis of the stamina of our state organism, and the thought of abolishing it caused unconscious feeling of fear, so censorship is deeply rooted in our customs, and there are no people ready to think that it alone maintains social order. […] Administrative penalties are a new plague containing such a mass harm, arbitrariness and injustice that protested and are protesting against them the kindest people. The system of administrative penalties is even more infected arbitrariness and injustice than preventive censorship, for punishes for guilt unforeseen by any positive law” [20] .
big number of books on censorship have been written and are currently available, including including those devoted to censorship carried out in Soviet times [21] .
Causes the authors' references to the topic of censorship are different, for example, research in the field of censorship N.M. Lemke, were generated by the fact that he himself was subjected to censorship persecution [22] . In an address from the author in the book "Spiritual censorship in Russia. (1799 - 1855) "Alexey Nikanorovich Kotovich wrote" ... Dedicating this book - a book of measured cries and discussed suffering - as the first gift love buried alive and their broken thoughts, we begin to create for them and their gravediggers an impartial court history " [23] .
Those the lessons that history gives us must be understood and realized, so as not to repeat now again and again those mistakes that have already been condemned by the court stories.
ABOUT censorship in tsarist Russia there is a rich literature, both published before 1917 year, and after 1917, publications about Soviet censorship in the Soviet there was practically no time - it was strictly classified. Generations Soviet people (those of them who, in their work, did not come across data secret phenomena) were completely unaware of the existence of censorship in the USSR and branched all-powerful censorship apparatus. First established by Lenin, as a temporary measure, censorship lasted almost almost until the collapse of the USSR. Recognition of the fact of literary censorship is found for the first time only in 1991 [24] .
Demanding The reader will ask what is all this for? After all censorship in Russia is prohibited by the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993!
Inadmissibility censorship was established even earlier in Art. 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation of December 27, 1991 N 2124-1 "On mass media", in which it is established that "Censorship mass media, that is, a requirement from the editorial office of the mass media information from officials, state bodies, organizations, institutions or public associations to preliminarily coordinate messages and materials (except when the official is the author or interviewees), as well as the imposition of a ban on the dissemination of messages and materials, their individual parts - is not allowed.
TO why commemorate the past? As L.N. Tolstoy in "NIKOLAI PALKIN" - "... we do not commemorate only because we know that we sick all the same, and we want to deceive ourselves” [25] .
Really censorship is prohibited in Russia by the Constitution, but introduced by the federal law "On countering extremist activity” [26] . This law allows under the guise of recognition of "information materials" extremist to produce censorship. There is a whole censored list, called the federal list of extremist materials, which includes everything that recognized as extremist material, including from leaflets and magazines to religious literature.
How noted in 2011 the deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation "the whole nine-year the practice of applying the federal law suggests that the perpetrators of forceful authorities that apply this law, misunderstanding the issues of ensuring security of the Russian Federation, often violate human rights and freedoms and citizens who banned more than 800 printed publications, recognizing them as harmful, which violates the rights and freedoms of citizens established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation Federation. There was no such censorship either in tsarist times or in the years of the Soviet Union. authorities" [27] .
The modern censorship procedure is significantly differs from what was carried out before and, above all, differs in that it is carried out while denying that censorship is being carried out. The years of Soviet power, during which, censorship was carried out as a fight against anti-Soviet propaganda, in the presence censorship denied, make themselves known.
Now it is carried out under the guise of a court hearing on the recognition of materials extremist, where the text is subjected to judgment.
For in order for the censorship process to be initiated, only the desire of the prosecutor is needed, of course, the censorship process will go faster when the prosecutor relieves the court of the need to read the censored text yourself, presenting the conclusion experts that the text is extremist. The court that received prosecutor's expert opinion that a particular text is extremist, feels comfortable, understanding that if the decision is substantiated by expertise, then there will be little chance of overturning it, since the higher court will not want to study the text.
However this means that the trial, which should be fair, is in fact only a tool for the prosecutor, who, with the help of an expert opinion, achieves censorship purpose.
L. N. Tolstoy in the novel "Resurrection" wrote: "In this is a mistake, what we are used to to think that the prosecutor's office, the judiciary in general, are some new liberal people. They were once so, but now it is completely different. These are officials concerned only the twentieth. He gets salary, he needs more, and this and all its principles are limited. He whoever you want to be accuse, judge, condemn. - Are there really laws according to which you can exile man for being together with reads the Gospel to others? - Not only to exile to places not so remote, but to hard labor, if only it can be proved that by reading Gospel, they allowed themselves interpret it to others not as ordered, and therefore they condemned the church interpretation".
Unfortunately these words written in the 19th century, for some will be relevant today. So today we are witnessing the persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses for religious activities, for dissemination of religious literature. Their literature, as well as literature of other religious denominations was recognized as extremist lists in the absence of violent actions or calls for them, only on based on the “opinion” of the “experts”, which the court trusted only because, at the conclusion reference was made to familiarizing "experts" with criminal liability. So in recently became famous court decision of Leninsky District Court of Orenburg dated March 21 2012 about prohibition of 65 Muslim books [28] , as a reason not to study the contested literature itself the already stereotyped phrase “the court has no reason not to trust the conclusions specialists warned of criminal liability for the dacha knowingly false conclusion under Art. 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Hiding behind this phrase, the court ended censorship process to ban 65 books in 20 minutes….
Necessary to note that 65 books are recognized as extremist in one court decision is far from a record. In Kazakhstan, on July 3, 2009, the court of Astana recognized as many as 207 extremist books, brochures, audio recordings [29] . In this "famous" decision, the court itself also did not investigate what it recognized as extremist and, in As a result, even the suras of the Koran were recognized as extremist ... . Subsequently there was issued a press release stating that placement on the website of the Ministry of Justice of the List of information materials, recognized by the court as extremist, a technical error was made. Actually case, by the decision of the court of Astana dated July 3 this year, among other printed and audio materials were recognized as extremist with a ban on import and dissemination in the territory of the republic of an audio recording of comments by unknown faces to the surahs of the Koran voiced by sheikhs Mishari Rashid and Faris Ubbad "Ahkaf" (Sands), "Muhammad", "Fatah" (Victory), "Khujrat" (Rooms), "Kaf", "Tabarak" (Power), "Kalam" (Writing cane), "Hakka" (Inevitable), "Maarazh" (Steps), "Nuh" (Noah), "Jinns", "Muzammil" (Wrapped up), "Muddasir" (Wrapped up), "Kiyama" (Sunday), "Insan" (Man), "Mursalat" (Sent), "Al-Baqarah" (Cow), "Al-Araf" (Barriers). Thus, the court recognized as extremist and banned audio recordings of commentaries on suras, not the suras of the Qur'an themselves" [30] .
Apparently it wasn't a technical error, since at the end of 2009 a new press release that, at the initiative of the General Prosecutor's Office of Kazakhstan By decision of the Astana court, a number of works. “According to the results of a new consideration of the case by the court on December 2 of this year, a new decision was made, according to which, of the previously recognized 53 materials were excluded as extremist, including audio recordings of comments unknown persons to the suras of the Koran. The ban on the distribution of these audio recordings was introduced in Kazakhstan by decision of the capital court at the end of September this year at the initiative of the Prosecutor General's Office. These are the following audio recordings. sur: "Sands", "Muhammad", "Victory", "Rooms", "Kaf", "Power", "Written cane", "Inevitable", "Steps", "Nuh", "Djinns", "Wrapped up", "Wrapped up", "Resurrection", "Man", "Sent", "Cow", "Barriers"" [31] .
Modern punitive (subsequent) censorship is very severe and its censors are not weighed down with the burden of studying censored material. In the 19th century, there was a slang term among censors "black caviar "- which meant blacked out for censorship reasons in black ink words and sentences. Modern censors don't bother looking for "objectionable" words and sentences, but censor lists.
We think it appropriate to a well-known technique used by censors in order to, without bothering themselves extend your subjective opinion to a whole list of literature. IN several conclusions, the "experts" showed this technique, which consists in answering to the question “can the materials provided be used as a single a set of means of propaganda influence. So simple and absolutely in a legal way, it is possible to recognize as extremist not only dozens of books by one list, but entire libraries. Necessary to say that it was just lucky that in the "library" provided by the prosecutor for recognition of extremist books in Leninsky the district court of Orenburg did not have the Koran - the court easily recognized extremist collections of hadiths (sayings) of the Prophet Muhammad, apparently not suspecting that hadiths are an integral part of the Sunnah - the second sacred source of the Revelation of Allah in the Islamic religion after the Qur'an. throughout appearances, the court, and most likely did not see any library, but only saw list provided by the prosecutor.
Modern censorship is not concerned with establishing direct meaning and necessity of the principle of good faith, on the contrary, it deals with interpretation and search for hidden meanings, finding even what they did not mean authors [32] .
At the beginning of the article, we cited the position of the censorship of the Statute, which stipulated that “When a place in doubt has a double meaning, in which case it is better to interpret it as the most beneficial for writer in a way rather than persecuting him. Now it turns out the other way around, at least the teacher of the Moscow Orthodox Theological Academy, member of the Scientific Advisory Board at Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation for the study of information materials religious content to identify signs of extremism in them Maksimov Yu.V. substantiates the need for his expertise as follows: "In accordance with the" Methodological recommendations "On the use of special knowledge on cases and materials about the excitation national, racial or religious hatred”, approved by the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation M.B. Katyshev 06/29/99 No. 27-19-99, if the author's ideas are expressed directly, and not veiled, a meaningful analysis of texts can be carried out without special knowledge (methods)" [33] . That is, where different interpretations are possible, an expert is needed - with all the external reasonableness of such an approach, the provisions of the tsarist censorship Charter were more fair and honest, the modern approach involves biased research.
Acquaintance with a range of "expert opinions" leaves a very painful impression due to their unprofessionalism and tendentiousness. Sometimes it seems that for experts it was just earnings, based on the embodiment of Richelieu's words: "Give me just six lines written by the hand of the most honest person, and I will find something for which he can be hanged ”....
For the sake of this income, "experts" easily go beyond limits of their competence and easily prejudge the case, responding to legal questions. The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation repeatedly forbade bringing before legal issues experts [34] , however, for some reason, conclusions containing in itself answers to legal questions are accepted by the courts ... . Sometimes there are even cases where "experts", apparently, in order to earn more, single-handedly carry out comprehensive examinations, which must, in accordance with the law, be carried out by several experts (part 2 of article 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). We even know of a case where, instead of two specialists psychologist and linguist, complex psychological and linguistic expertise, the conclusion was “made” by an unknown scientific specialty in Russia - psycholinguist [35] .
Even in the 19th century censors did not psychologists were appointed, since the competence of psychologists is reduced to analysis of the manifestations of the human psyche. During trials, psychologists involved when it is necessary to establish individual psychological characteristics of the participants in the process, their ability to correctly perceive significance for the case of circumstances, the presence or absence of physiological affect. In this case, the object of research is the person himself.
Engaging psychologists as experts in cases of recognition of information materials as extremist possible only to determine the results of the impact of the analyzed information materials for the audience (readers, viewers, listeners), determining the actual or potential reaction of the audience to the published materials.
However, the corresponding results should be obtained experimentally, and not be subjective conclusions specific expert about his impressions of the read text. Therefore, the estimate potential (hypothetical) impact of informational material, made only by studying its content, can be considered as a purely private expert opinion, but not as a result of expert research. Wherein, assessment of the potential impact of the text on the audience cannot be categorical and unconditional, since the features of comprehension and perception of information person depends on a large number of factors.
Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation in the "List of genera (types) of examinations performed in state forensic institutions of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation” [36] referred to competencies of psychological expertise research of psychology and human psychophysiology, and to the competence of linguistic - research products of speech activity.
If psychologists involved in establishing the semantic content of information materials, it is clear that the study they carried out would be outside their jurisdiction and would be inadmissible evidence. However, the courts are willing to accept the opinions of psychologists, in which they willingly act as experts, making judgments about the extremist nature religious literature, apparently having difficulty with the projection factor, (in In psychology, the projection factor is understood as a situation where the cognizer can attribute to another person their own character traits, thoughts, moods, feelings that the assessed person may not have, which leads to prejudice, an erroneous understanding of people, their intentions and behavior).
Psychophysiological and the psychological substantiation of the projection factor is given in the teachings of A.A. Ukhtomsky about dominante: "... a man prejudiced ... that he is surrounded by gluttons, egoists and scoundrels, will successfully find confirmation of this conviction even then, when he meets Socrates himself or Spinoza. The deceiver suspects everything deception, and the thief sees theft everywhere ... When people condemn others, then they only discover their own, hidden in themselves Double: dirty in thoughts, everything seems pre-dirty; the envious and the secret money-grubber seem to be in others money-grubbers; egoist, precisely because he is an egoist, declares everyone on principle selfish. Wherever a person condemns others, he comes from his Double, and condemnation is at the same time a secret, very subtle, all the more poisonous self-justification, i.e. reassurance on oneself and on one's points of view (dominant on the Double) obscures the eyes of reality, and then tragedy sets in: people do not recognize Socrates, declare him a mischievous eccentric, force him to die!" [37] .
However, this "psychological explanation" is only a transcription of the gospel wisdom:
"Light came into the world; but people loved the darkness more than the light, because their works were evil; for everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works were exposed, because they are evil” (Gospel of John chapter 3, 19-20).
Perhaps that is why one the same names of experts often appear in cases on the recognition of information extremist materials.
If already we are talking about experts, then, in our opinion, even competent and impartial experts still cannot be censors and give censorship conclusion. This or that interpretation of religious texts cannot be the basis to restrict freedom of thought, conscience and belief. In our opinion, only actions can be punished, not thoughts and ideas. Not books, but people who made crimes that committed violent acts or called for violence.
In the Ruling in the case “The Religious Community of Jehovah's Witnesses in Moscow v. Russian Federation” (Complaint no. 302/02) dated On June 10, 2010, the ECtHR specifically recalled its already formed jurisprudence that, in accordance with Article 9 of the European Convention "On the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms" freedom of thought, conscience and religion is one of the foundations of a "democratic society" within the meaning of the European conventions. It is this religious parameter of hers that is one of the most important elements that make up the personality of believers and their worldview, but it is also the most valuable asset for atheists, agnostics, skeptics and indifferent. Pluralism is based on it, inseparable from democratic society and won at a high cost over the centuries (see par. 114 The judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case “Church Metropolia of Bessarabia and others against Moldova” (Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova) on application no. 45701/99, EСHR 2001-XII). Religious freedom, being primarily a matter of conscience for each individual person, provides for, inter alia, the freedom to “manifest [one’s] religion” individually, privately or in community with others, publicly or in circle of fellow believers. Since religious communities traditionally exist in the form of organized structures, it is necessary to interpret Article 9 of the European Convention in light of Article 11 of the European Convention, which provides for guarantees against unreasonable state interference in the activities of associations. Taking into account believers' right to freedom of religion, which includes the right to profess their religion in common with others, gives reason to expect that believers will allowed to freely join associations without arbitrary interference states. Indeed, the independent existence of religious communities is an essential condition for pluralism in a democratic society and, accordingly, a key object of protection guaranteed by Article 9 of the European Convention. IN in accordance with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, the duty of the state to maintaining neutrality and impartiality is inconsistent with any of its powers to assess the legitimacy of religious beliefs (see par. 118 and 123 of the above judgment of the European Court in the case “Church Metropolia of Bessarabia [and others against Moldova]” (Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia [and Others v. Moldova]); and para 62 of the Grand Chamber judgment European Court of Justice in Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC]) under Complaint No. 30985/96, ECHR 2000-XI).
WITH two years have passed since this reminder of the ECtHR and ... there were no lessons retrieved. Currently, there are already several complaints related to the application of the law on extremism sent by the European Court for submission by the Russian Authorities explanations [38] . By Apparently, we are waiting for more new cases in the ECtHR.
Moreover, the existing jurisprudence gives for there are many reasons for this. The most common violation is consideration of the case in special proceedings - a procedure created for the consideration indisputable cases.
Another common violation is consideration cases for the recognition of religious books extremist without involving all interested parties, without involving religious associations, without the involvement of publishers, authors and owners copyright.
Although, of course, the most a big violation is the very consideration of cases on the recognition of religious books extremist - censorship of religions is unacceptable, only criminal deeds. Currently, we are seeing that offenses are born in as a result of the activities of law enforcement agencies, it is initially recognized extremist religious literature, and then the spread of religious literature becomes an offense ... But the artificial criminalization religion does not improve the situation, but rather worsens the situation with countering the implementation of real violent extremist crimes.
Unfortunately, the imperfection of the law allows a broad interpretation of the concept of "extremism", which allows legalized censorship and the fight against dissent in our country [39] . Even proponents of censorship point out that the legislative definition extremist materials, fixed in Art. 1. Federal Law No. 114-FZ "On countering extremist activity", "does not give full clarity when they are identified, so this wording can only be considered as framework, in need of clarification and comments” [40] .
Existing jurisprudence confirms the imperfection law, as a result of which the same books, pamphlets, slogans in the same courts are not recognized as extremist, while other courts recognize extremist.
April 6, 2005 The Kirovsky District Court of Omsk acquitted D. Isabaev, moreover, the judicial The Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Omsk Regional Court ruled not only acquittal, but also a private ruling in the case of Isabaev, in which about the actions of law enforcement agencies, the following is said: “all accusatory activity on apparently far-fetched charges sparked outrage a significant part of the Muslim population practicing Islam, and allowed its most radical leaders to claim that Muslims are being persecuted exclusively for religious beliefs. And for this, judging by the results, trial, there were strong arguments" [41] . However, later on those however, the books published by Isabaev were nevertheless recognized as extremist, which was reason for another appeal to the ECtHR [42] .
"Society receives what his attention is riveted to. If public attention is chained to spiritual values, and not to crime, then for humanity a new day will come" [43] .
I remember the words of the President Russian V.V. Putin said in 2002 in Kazan at the III World Congress of Tatars - “ There is one moment that is extremely important - this is the interaction between the state and confessions. On the attitude of the state to the churches, in general to religion. We have now there is nothing else but religion that can convey to each of us common human values. There is nothing else. Therefore, if someone pulls away from churches, from mosques, from synagogues, I think this is a mistake. It is mine private opinion, and the state and I, as the head of state, cannot interfere in the activities of confessions.
Unfortunately these wonderful words were forgotten, and now ten years later, the situation with unreasonable restriction freedom of conscience and religion under the guise of combating extremism has become so hot that in the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation on June 13, 2012 they held hearings on the topic: “On the features of the use of anti-extremist legislation to the scriptures of religious organizations”. On this hearing, it was unanimously expressed that the Federal Law "On countering extremist activity” should not apply to doctrinal texts of religious organizations officially registered in Russia. "Religious organizations in respect of which such decision, it will be necessary to apply to the Constitutional Court," Director of the Institute for Monitoring the Efficiency of Law Enforcement of the Public Chamber and member of the Public Chamber Elena Lukyanova [44] .
In the Conclusion on the Federal Law "On Counteracting extremist activity”, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 91st Plenary Session (Venice, 15-16 June 2012) it was stated that the arbitrary application of the law on countering extremism opens up the possibility of imposing tough restrictions on fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the European Convention on human rights (in particular arts. 6, 9, 10 and 11) and violates the principles legality, necessity and proportionality. In this regard, the Commission recommends bringing legislation into line with the European Convention on Human Rights and offers its assistance and assistance in this work [45] .
As citizens of Russia, we would like the rights and human freedoms in Russia were respected, and were not the dream of idealists. citizens Russia deserve respect for their rights and freedoms and that their state perceived as intelligent beings who can themselves separate the wheat from the chaff and do not need censorship guardianship, in its disguised as a fight against manifestations of extremism.
Totalitarianism always begins with attempts to destroy the right to freely receive and distribute ideas, but as Heinrich Heine rightly noted - where they start by destroying books, they inevitably end up killing people. And no matter how well-intentioned the destruction of the books is. Inquisition was also based on good intentions, but continued with bonfires.
“... But now is not about that.
I so want to live
The one who throws a ray of light into this
Abandoned, abandoned, abandoned by God world…” [46] .
Sultanov Aidar Rustemovich, head of the legal department of OJSC Nizhnekamskneftekhim, Judge of the Energy Arbitration Court, member of the Association for Better Life and Education (ABLE)
List of used literature:
1. Alekseeva L. History dissent in the USSR. M.1990.
2. Antonovich A. Ya. Kurs state improvement (police law). Kyiv. 1889 cit. according to ATP GuaranteedMaximum.
3. Arseniev K.K. Press legislation. The great reforms of the 60s in their past and present. Under the editorship of Gessen and Kaminka. SPb. 1903 G.
4. Blum A. Backstage "Ministries of Truth": The Secret History of Soviet Censorship (1917–1929). SPb., 1994.
5. Blum A. Soviet Censorship in the Age of Total Terror: 1929–1953. SPb., 2000.
6. Bogdanov A.P. Feather and cross: Russian writers under the ecclesiastical court. M., 1990.
7. Goryaeva T. M. Political censorship in the USSR. 1917-1991 M.2009.
8. Gradovsky A.D. Beginnings Russian state law. Volume I. SPb. 1875
9. Egorov A.E. Pages lived / / Censorship in Russia in the late XIX - early XX century. Collection of memories. SPb.2003. P.141.
10. Edlin V.A. A comment to the Federal Law of July 25, 2002 N 114-FZ "On countering extremist activity". - System GARANT, 2010
11. Elistratov A. I. Administrative law. M. 1911 cit. according to ATP GarantMaximum.
12. Zhirkov G. V. L. N. Tolstoy and censorship. SPb.2009.
13. Zhirkov G.V. The dying censor week of Leo Tolstoy. Astapov drama. St. Petersburg. 2011.
14. Zhirkov G.V. Story censorship in Russia in the 19th–20th centuries. M. 2001.
15. Kizevetter A. Dukhovnaya censorship in Russia. (Al. Kotovich: "Spiritual censorship in Russia 1799 - 1855 SPb., 1909)
16. Kotovich A.N. Spiritual censorship in Russia. (1799 - 1855). St. Petersburg, 1909.
17. Lebedev V.K. "Mistake" of censorship. Russian literature. No. 3. 1974
18. Lemke M.K. Nikolaev gendarmes and literature 1828-1855, St. Petersburg, 1909.
19. Lemke M.K. Epoch censorship reforms. 1859-1865. SPb., 1904.
20. Lemke N.M. Essays on history of Russian censorship and journalism of the 19th century. SPb., 1909.
21. Makushin L. M. Censored regime and journalism. From the Cast Iron Charter of 1826 to the Press Law of 1865. In two books. Yekaterinburg, 2009.
22. Mezier A. V. Dictionary Russian censors: Materials for a bibliography on the history of Russian censorship. M., 2000.
23. Martsokha I.E. Institute censorship in the information legal policy of Russia. Abstract of the dissertation on competition for the degree of candidate of legal sciences. Rostov-on-Don. 2007.
24. Nikitenko A.V. Notes, diary: in 3 vols. M., 2005. ( reprint of Nikitenko A. V. Notes, diary: in 3 vols. SPb. 1893)
25. Reifman P.S. From the history Russian, Soviet and post-Soviet censorship.
26. Religious associations. Freedom of conscience and religion. religious studies expertise//comp. Pchelintsev A.V., Ryakhovsky V.V. Chugunov. S.V. M. 2009.
27. Rosenberg V., Yakushkin V. Russian press and censorship in the past and present, M., 1905.
28. Skabichevsky A.M. Essays on the history of Russian censorship. 1892.
29. Sultanov A.R. European legal standards, history lessons and law enforcement practice. M. 2012.
- Charter on Censorship of 1804// Russian journalism in documents: History of supervision / comp. O.D. Minaeva, ed. B.I. Esin and Ya.N. Zasursky M.2003.
31. Utkin, B. T. Bibliography and censorship (notes by a Chelyabinsk bibliographer on recent past days) / B. T. Utkin II Bibliographer: personality, skill, ethics. Chelyabinsk, 1995.
32. Ukhtomsky A.A. Dominant. SPb. 2002.
33. Fuchs. Note on censorship SPb., 1862
34. Hubbard L.R. Influence religions in society.
35. Chernykh A. "Sacred books are preparing an amnesty. The OP will protect them from allegations of extremism.” "Kommersant", No. 106 (4891), 06/14/2012
36. Engelhard N. Essays history of Russian censorship in connection with the development of the press. (1703-1903). SPb., 1904. S. 265.
Published in Advocate magazine №7 2012.
© 2012 Sultanov Aydar Rustemovich
[1] URL: http://www.rvb.ru/tolstoy/01text/vol_12/01text/0283.htm (accessed 20.06.2012).
[2] Censorship control of official (secular or spiritual) authorities over the content, release into light and distribution of printed materials, content (performance, display) plays and other stage performances. works, film and photographic works, depict, claims, radio and television broadcasts, and sometimes private correspondence, in order to to prevent or restrict the dissemination of ideas and information recognized by these powers undesirable or harmful. By ways implementation of censorship is divided into preliminary and subsequent (punitive). Prior censorship involves the need to obtain permission to release books, staging plays, etc., the subsequent one consists in evaluating already published, issued editions, staged plays, etc. and in acceptance restrictive or prohibitive measures against those that violate the requirements of censorship.
[3] Lebedev V.K. "Error" censorship. Russian literature. No. 3. 1974
[4] See more Sultanov A.R. European legal standards, lessons from history and law enforcement practice. M. 2012.
[5] URL: http://ilibrary.ru/text/1850/p.18/index.html (Accessed 20.06.2012).
[6] Charter on Censorship of 1804// Russian journalism in documents: History of supervision / comp. O.D. Minaeva, ed. B.I. Esin and Ya.N. Zasursky M.2003. URL: http://site.mediascope.ru/?q=node/61 (Date of access 20.06.2012); Charter about The censorship of 1804 can be found in Legislation Emperor Alexander I. 1801-1811 (compiler and author introductory article by V.A. Tomsinov). M. 2011
[7] In our opinion, this interpretation is still more the proclamation and implementation of the principle good faith, rather than the principle of interpreting irremovable doubts in favor of the accused (which we know in modern criminal, administrative and tax law of the Russian Federation).
[8] It should be noted that this provision was also retained in the third censorship Charter of 1828.
[9] See more Lemke M.K. Nikolaev gendarmes and literature 1828-1855 St. Petersburg, 1909; URL: http://www.runivers.ru/upload/iblock/fde/zhandarmy.djvu (accessed 20.06.2012).
[10] See more Lemke M.K. The era of censorship reforms. 1859-1865. Spb., 1904. URL: http://histans.com/LiberUA/Lemke_EpTsenzRef_1904/Lemke_EpTsenzRef_1904.pdf (date appeals 20.06.2012); Fuchs. Note on censorship, St. Petersburg, 1862
[11] Decree of Alexander II of 6 April 1865 - On granting some relief and convenience to the domestic press. URL: http://site.mediascope.ru/?q=node/64 (date appeals 20.06.2012).
[12] Elistratov A. I. Administrative law. M. 1911 cit. according to ATP GarantMaximum.
[13] Antonovich A. Ya. The course of state improvement (police law). Kyiv. 1889 cit. according to ATP GuaranteedMaximum.
[14] See more about the spiritual censorship of an earlier period unique research Kotovich A.N. Spiritual censorship in Russia. (1799 - 1855). St. Petersburg, 1909. URL: http://nasledie.enip.ras.ru/ras/view/publication/browser.html?clear=true&perspective=popup&id=43107941 (date of treatment 06/22/2012); Kizevetter A. Spiritual censorship in Russia. (Al. Kotovich: "Spiritual censorship in Russia 1799 - 1855. St. Petersburg, 1909) URL: http://relig-library.pstu.ru/catalog/706/book-706.pdf (Accessed 22.06.2012).
[15] Gradovsky A.D. Beginnings of Russian state law. Volume I. St. Petersburg. 1875
[16] See more Zhirkov G. V. L. N. Tolstoy and censorship. SPb.2009. Zhirkov G. V. Tolstoy's last week of censorship. Astapov drama. St. Petersburg. 2011.
[17] Egorov A.E. Pages lived / / Censorship in Russia in the late XIX - early XX centuries. Collection of memories. SPb.2003. P.141.
[18] Rosenberg V., Yakushkin V. Russian press and censorship in the past and present, M., 1905.
[19] Zhirkov G.V. History of censorship in Russia in the 19th–20th centuries. M. 2001. URL: http://evartist.narod.ru/text9/37.htm#з_16 (accessed 06/22/2012).
[20] Cited. By. Enegelgard N. Essays on the history of Russian censorship in connection with the development of the press. (1703-1903). St. Petersburg, 1904, p. 265 (accessed 22.06.2012).
[21] Arseniev K.K. Press legislation. Great reforms of the 60s in their past and present. Under the editorship of Gessen and Kaminka. SPb. 1903; Skabichevsky A.M. History essays Russian censorship. 1892. URL: http://bookfi.org/dl/735886/043672 (accessed 06/20/2012), http://gen.lib.rus.ec/get?nametype=orig&md5=F137619F8B0004A8952C5418A416130E (Date of access 20.06.2012) ; Reifman P.S. From the history of Russian, Soviet and post-Soviet censorship. URL: http://lepo.it.da.ut.ee/~pavel/index1.htm (Date of access 20.06.2012); Nikitenko A. V. Notes, diary: in 3 vols. M., 2005. (reprinted by Nikitenko A.V. Notes, diary: in 3 vols. St. Petersburg. 1893 URL: http://reformshistory.ru/fajlovyj-arkhiv/viewcategory/125-av-nikitenko (date address 06/20/2012), Blum A. Behind the scenes of the "Ministry of Truth": Secret history of Soviet censorship (1917–1929). SPb., 1994. Blum A. Soviet censorship in era of total terror: 1929–1953. St. Petersburg, 2000; Bogdanov A.P. Feather and cross: Russian writers under the ecclesiastical court. M., 1990; Makushin L. M. Censorship regime and journalism. From the Cast Iron Charter of 1826 to the Press Law of 1865. In two books. Yekaterinburg, 2009; Mezier A. V. Dictionary of Russian censors: Materials for bibliography on the history of Russian censorship. M., 2000; Alekseeva L. History of dissent in the USSR. M.1990. URL: http://library.khpg.org/files/docs/1314780425.pdf (date appeals 20.06.2012); Goryaeva T. M. Political censorship in the USSR. 1917-1991 _ M.2009. URL: http://www.fedy-diary.ru/html/062011/23062011-08a.html (date appeals 20.06.2012) and many others. others
[22] In addition to those already cited, see Lemke N.M. Essays on history of Russian censorship and journalism of the 19th century. St. Petersburg, 1909. URL: http://imwerden.de/pdf/lemke_ocherki_po_istorii_cenzury_1904.pdf (accessed 06/20/2012).
[23] Kotovich A.N. Spiritual censorship in Russia. (1799 - 1855). St. Petersburg, 1909. S. III.
[24] Utkin, B. T. Bibliography and censorship (notes of the Chelyabinsk bibliographer on the affairs of recent days) / B. T. Utkin II Bibliographer: personality, skill, ethics. Chelyabinsk, 1995.
[25] Tolstoy L.N. Nicholas Palkin. URL: http://www.rvb.ru/tolstoy/01text/vol_17_18/vol_17/02edit/0357.htm (Accessed 06/23/2012)
[26] In this article, we do not we touch on censorship provided for by federal constitutional laws dated May 30, 2001 N 3-FKZ "On emergency position" and dated January 30, 2002 Mr. N 1-FKZ "On martial law".
[27] Explanatory note to the draft federal law N 565952-5 "On recognizing as invalid the Federal Law "On Counteracting extremist activity" and certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation in the field of countering extremist activity". Quoted from the ATP GarantMaximum.
[28] Decision of the Leninsky District Court of Orenburg dated March 21, 2012 URL: http://www.lawfulstate.ru/index.php/zashitaprav/2010-03-28-13-27-47/affected-all-islamic-publishers/the-court -s-decision-to-ban-books.html (Accessed 06/23/2012).
[29] URL: http://www.mdvd.kz/index2.php?page=content/rights_extmat.php⟨=ru (accessed 24.06.2012).
[30] URL: http://www.automan.kz/334899-minjust-kazakhstana-nazval-zapret-korana.html (accessed 24.06.2012).
[31] URL: http://www.centrasia.ru/news2.php?st=1260867540 (accessed 24.06.2012).
[32] How can one not recall A.S. Pushkin and his Message to the censor" - "Suspicious of everything, you see poison in everything." URL: http://www.rvb.ru/pushkin/01text/01versus/0217_22/1822/0131.htm (accessed 06/24/2012).
[33] URL: http://www.ansar.ru/analytics/2012/06/18/31073 (Accessed 24.06.2012).
[34] See Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 21, 2010 N 28 "On forensic examination in criminal cases", Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 28 June 2011 N 11 "On judicial practice in criminal cases on crimes extremist orientation, Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 24, 2008 N 11 "On preparing civil cases for trial.
[35] Shchelkovsky's solution City Court of the Moscow Region dated 06/30/2011.
[36] Approved by the Order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation of May 14, 2003 N 114 (as amended on March 12, 2007) "On approval of the List of genera (types) of examinations performed in state forensic institutions of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, and List of expert specialties for which the right is granted independent production of forensic examinations in state forensic institutions of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation" // Bulletin of normative acts of federal executive bodies, N 24, 06/16/2003.
[37] Ukhtomsky A.A. Dominant. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2002. S. 358-359
[38] Complaint in the case of Ibragimov and the cultural and educational fund Nuru Badi v. Russia (Ibragimov and Cultural Educational Fund Nuru Badi v. Russia) N 1413/08 communicated on March 18, 2011; complaint in the case of Valiullin and the Association of Mosques Russia v. Russia (Valiullin and the Accociation of Mosques of Russia v. Russia) application no. 30112/08 was communicated to the Russian Authorities on March 17, 2011 and etc.
[39] Edlin V.A. Commentary on the Federal Law of 25 July 2002 N 114-FZ "On countering extremist activity". - System GARANT, 2010
[40] Martsokha I.E. Institute of censorship in the information Russian legal policy. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree candidate of legal sciences. Rostov-on-Don. 2007. S. 22.
[41] Religious associations. Freedom of conscience and religion. Religious expertise//comp. Pchelintsev A.V., Ryakhovsky V.V. Chugunov. S.V. M. 2009. S. 896-897.
[42] Complaint in the case of Ibragimov and the cultural and educational fund Nuru Badi v. Russia (Ibragimov and Cultural Educational Fund Nuru Badi v. Russia) N 1413/08
[43] Hubbard L.R. The influence of religion in society. URL: http://www.iasrus.ru/religion.html (date of access 06/16/2012)
[44] Chernykh A. “The sacred books are prepared amnesty. OP protect them from accusations of extremism.” "Kommersant", No. 106 (4891), 06/14/2012 URL: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc-y/1957952 (Date of access 06/16/2012)
[45] URL: http://www.venice.coe.int/site/dynamics/N_Opinion_ef.asp?L=E&OID=660 (accessed 06/24/2011), URL: http://www.sova-center. ru/misuse/news/counteraction/2012/06/d24724/ (accessed 06/24/2011)
[46] Makarevich A. Thrown by God the world.
Same article in other threads: