Business for the word

The Zamoskvoretsky court of Moscow the other day on the sixth time he postponed the hearing in the case of Konstantin Krylov. Now they are appointed on October 3.

This business stumbles from the very beginning. Twice the court was postponed in connection with the non -appearance of witnesses of the prosecution - employees of the Main Directorate for Combating Extremism of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, it is also the E -E Center (employees were justified by great employment at work). The judge was busy for the third time. The fourth turned out that the judge had gone on vacation. The fifth judge was hastily called to the Moscow City Court. In the sixth, the investigator did not appear, called as a witness. Then in the case there was a replacement of the prosecutor.

It seems that the case in its current form does not have a judicial perspective. It is possible that the preliminary investigation urgently searches for additional material. Perhaps those who conduct the process realized that Krylov’s case received the wrong public resonance that was designed for.

Konstantin Krylov is one of the ideologists of Russian nationalism, philosopher, publicist and writer -science fiction. Part 1 of Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is charged with “actions aimed at initiating hatred or enmity, as well as to humiliate the dignity of a person or group of persons according to the grounds of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, attitude to religion, as well as belonging to any social group, committed publicly or using the media.”

Since people who have no origin, gender, race, language, nationality, attitude to religion and belonging to the social group are not available in nature, anyone can be attracted by this article, which is what the maximum “E” center does.

Until now, I believed that in the liberal camp the 282nd is supported by only one person - the executive director of the “For Human Rights” movement Leo Ponomarev, who called himself her “conscious supporter”. But it just turned out that this point of view is shared by the head of the information and analytical service of the same movement Evgeny Nilov. It is especially annoying to me, because I am a fan of this author and I read each of his text with great interest and pleasure.

Mr. Nilov argues his position by reference to article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , which states that the propaganda of war, national, racial or religious hatred should be prohibited by law. But, firstly, the package does not say anything about hostility on the grounds of origin, gender, language and belonging to the social group, so the Criminal Code with more than exceeded the requirement of the pact. Secondly, Article 19 of the Pact says: "Everyone has the right to a free expression of his opinion." This right can be limited for the sake of respect for the rights and reputation of other persons, as well as to protect state security, public order, health or morality of the population. Article 21 of the pact guarantees the right to peaceful meetings with the same only reservation: "The use of this right is not subject to any restrictions, except for those that are imposed in accordance with the law and which are necessary in democratic society in the interests of state or public security, public order, the protection of health and morality of the population and the protection of the rights and freedoms of other persons."

But the rights and reputation of other persons are protected by other articles of the Code. The pact does not require criminal prosecution for the promotion of hatred. The pact does not specify how the opinion differs from propaganda.

The problem is not in the article, says Nilov. "The problem is that it is used, as a rule, meanly and slyly." Of course. That's all the point. That's why God does not give a vigorous cow.

Konstantin Krylov is accused of the fact that in October last year he spoke at the rally "Stop feeding the Caucasus!" With statements that form the corpus delicti under Art. 282 of the Criminal Code. Or, as stated in the indictment, "committed hatred or enmity, as well as humiliation of human dignity." (This and other documents in the case of Krylov are posted on Facebook and VKontakte .)

The rally was not prohibited on the grounds specified in Art. 21 pacts on civil and political rights. Krylov did not call for violence against immigrants from the Caucasus, did not claim that these were the subhuman. At the same rally, Alexei Navalny, Vladimir Milov, Alexander Belov, Daniil Konstantinov and Vladimir Thor (with the speeches of the Krasnodar Governor Tkachev, I don’t compare it). But the prosecution is brought by one Krylov. He himself believes that condemnation on an “extremist” article is an ideal reason for refusing to register the party, which he is now creating.

In the affairs of the 282nd article, the exceptional role belongs to experts - it is they who determine the presence of "excitement" in the public statements of the accused. In this case, the examination was carried out by employees of the State Unitary Enterprise " Center for Information and Analytical Technologies " Oksana Malantseva and Yulia Safonova. Oksana Dmitrievna graduated from the Moscow State Psychological and Pedagogical University with a degree in Legal Psychology just two years ago. Nevertheless, as stated in conclusion, she has three years of expert experience. She is the author of a number of articles about extremism and xenophobia. In one of them, she admits :

The main difficulty arising during complex psychological linguistic examinations is the lack of a unified production methodology, since the type of this examination has a fairly short story, and the general expert experience has not yet been formed.

So she forms it with articles and examinations.

Julia Aleksandrovna - candidate of philological sciences, formerly a researcher at the Vinogradov Institute of Russian Language, editor -in -chief of the portal Gradoma.ru. Now she is the head of the psychological linguistic examinations of the State Unitary Enterprise "CIT", and Oksana Dmitrievna is her deputy.

Last year, both scientists of the ladies participated in a comprehensive sociological and psychological linguistic examination of a T-shirt with the inscription "Orthodoxy or death!". The two previous examinations came to mutually exclusive conclusions. In particular, employees of the Russian Institute of Cultural Studies Vitaly Batov and Natalya Kryukova, famous for those who saw extremism in the slogan “Kill the slave in themselves!” Snoveed for themselves this time. Oksana Dmitrievna and Julia Alexandrovna, on the contrary, did not notice any extremism in a T -shirt. And now, for example, why :

The idea that the falling away from the Orthodox faith is worse than death, expressed in the analyzed slogan, cannot be considered outside the context - the fundamental foundations of the Orthodox doctrine about the exceptional role of the Church in the business of the soul ... The communicative goal is not aimed at propaganda of exclusivity, superiority or inferiority of citizens, by their attitude to religion ... There are no calls to arouses in disputed information materials. Religious races substantiating or justifying the excitement of religious growth.

The same indulgence as in relation to the Hoorfuls, experts showed the experts at the rally "Stop feeding the Caucasus!" Vladimir Torah:

These statements express a hostile attitude towards Caucasians and migrant workers, but do not form hostile attitudes in relation to Caucasians and guest workers.

In the speeches of other speakers, they also did not find "signs of the excitement of growth (enmity, hatred) in relation to any groups of people."

Another thing is Krylov. In his speech there was a fatal phrase "It is time to end with this strange economic model." I’ll clarify that the entire pathos of the rally consisted of exposing the “budgetary inequality” in favor of the Caucasus and those people in the Kremlin and the government to which this inequality is beneficial. This is what social group is actually protected by Ms. Malantsev and Safonov. But they write something completely different:

... The speeches of stated Krylov contains a statement of an incentive nature (“It is time to end with this strange economic model”), which based on the semantic orientation of the entire performance of Krylov can be perceived by the audience as encouraging the hostile actions of Russians as a group of people in relation to Caucasians.

When the criminal case of Konstantin Krylov was instituted, I expected a repetition of the story with Boris Stomakhin, from whom some reputable human rights activists turned their nose. But with Krylov it turned out differently. Fiction Cyril Yeskov mobilized the brothers in the genre. As a result, despite the individual objections , the appeal he wrote to the Prosecutor General’s office collected a large number of signatures, and not only science fiction writers - he was signed, for example, playwright Vladimir Golyshev, poet Alexei Tsvetkov, Vladimir Bukovsky, whose name does not require additions. Alexey Tsvetkov and Dmitry Bykov came to defense of Krylov in personal quality.

But Evgeny Iholov does not like such unconditional support. Reminding Eskov the plot of his own novel "The Last Ring Estate", he rhetorically asks:

So, is Eskov, who, so convincingly and sincerely described the elven moral preparation for the massacre, did not understand how historically the Anticavian invectives will end?! I would expect from him, except for the defense of a friend in Peru from the Investigative Committee, also human words into the condemnation of nationalist demagogy.

This is exactly what some “defenders” of Pussy Riot did: demanding to free the accused, they condemned the “punk-summer”, without realizing that they were on the side of the prosecution.

I also do not like Russian nationalism. But one cannot help but recognize the right to exist, centuries -old history, tradition and, finally, merits. Of course, I am not talking about brutalized hunters or operetta bustling men, but about thinkers who make up the glory and golden cultural fund of Russia, from Slavophiles to Konstantin Leontiev. Konstantin Krylov undoubtedly continues this line. Let him justify him - then you will argue with him and condemn him.