.jpg)
UPD. The court in St. Petersburg decided to transfer the consideration of the case to Moscow, at the place of residence of the detainees. Mitya Aleshkovsky reported this on his Facebook page.
On the evening of March 14, at St. Petersburg Pulkovo Airport, police detained blogger Mitya Aleshkovsky, his colleague at the charity organization “Need Help” Sergei Gubanov and blogger Yuri Gavrikov from a local LGBT portal. They were kept at the Pulkovo-1 police station all night. The trial is supposed to take place on the afternoon of March 15, but there is no exact information yet. Aleshkovsky himself wrote a post on Facebook at night: “We were taken to Pulkovo because I was giving an interview to an LGBT portal. They are intimidating us. They are accusing us of illegal filming or something like that. They called in witnesses and the FSO. I missed the flight to Moscow.”
On the way to court on the afternoon of March 15, Aleshkovsky again wrote on Facebook: “The night was fun and cheerful. We are going to the Moscow district court of St. Petersburg. I have never seen more incompetent policemen.” There is no contact with Aleshkovsky yet - apparently, his phone was taken away.
Meanwhile, his mother Tamara Eidelman, a few hours later, wrote on her Facebook page that the court session was closed: “The court session is closed!!! Did they violate military secrets? And so far only Mitya is involved. The rest are waiting.” The court is closed. regime, because Pulkovo is a sensitive facility," according to the judge."
PublicPost learned the details from Aleshkovsky’s mother Tamara Eidelman and his lawyer Svetlana Ratnikova.
Tamara Eidelman, mother of Mitya Aleshkovsky:
“Mitya went to St. Petersburg for one day because he was filming a project - gays and lesbians who live like ordinary people - to show that you can be an ordinary person and at the same time gay. When he flew away with a colleague, they were interviewed by a blogger for LGBT portal. The police came and said that it was impossible to film at the airport. Mitya said that he knew that it was possible to film. To which they replied that Petersburg is a regime city. I don’t even know what that means. there was an altercation, and all three of them were taken away. Then they were subjected to a personal search, the FSO was called, and they were accused of illegal filming. Since then, the CC deputy Pivovarov found them a lawyer, Svetlana. I spoke to her today. that the police department will be ready to send them to court only after two.
— When was the last time you had contact with him?
Mitya wrote on Facebook at about 12 o'clock at night, after which he stopped responding. And this morning the lawyer told me that his phone was taken away."
Svetlana Ratnikova, lawyer:
“Mitya was detained for disobedience, Article 19.3 of the Administrative Code, part 1. Now we are waiting for what the court will say. The information we receive is different: we were told by 11 o’clock, but now there is no one in court. We called back, they told us: “Just about We're leaving." There is also other information that a trial has been scheduled for 2 o'clock.
— How adequate is the detention of Mitya Aleshkovsky and his two other colleagues from a legal point of view?
It is completely inadequate. Moreover, in principle, they do not talk about filming in the protocols. They say that they did not provide a passport. According to some explanations from the police, they asked to stop filming. First, the demand must be legal. What is it based on? Accordingly, if the demand is illegal, then there is no talk of disobedience.
About the rules of photography at the airport (source - AntiRAO portal ) Measures to ensure security at airports are regulated by the Regulations on the Federal System for Ensuring the Protection of Civil Aviation Activities from Acts of Unlawful Interference , as well as the Federal Aviation Rules “Aviation Security Requirements for Airports” adopted on its basis. The rules are mandatory for persons operating on the territory of airports. They do not and cannot apply to passengers, since they were not approved by the Government, as required by the PZPP. Restrictions on filming are established by these rules only in the so-called “controlled area of the airport,” which includes “the working area of the airport, the adjacent territory and buildings located near it or part of them, access to which is controlled.” Visitors and persons not working at the airport are allowed into such an area only with passes. In it, the airport administration has the right to restrict filming (paragraph "b" clause 16 of the Rules). In addition, the ban on the use of filming equipment in the controlled area is contained in clause 3.4 of the “Regulations on access and internal control at airports, airlines, organizations and institutions of civil aviation.” However, paragraph 1.3 of the same Regulations applies only to persons working at airports. The area where passengers are allowed to board the plane is called “sterile”, and the Regulations do not contain a ban on filming there. |
— What sanctions, in your opinion, can be applied to them?
I hope that everything will be stopped if everything complies with the Code of Administrative Offences. I spent from 12 at night to 8 in the morning in the department, we entered all violations into the protocol. It is possible that your request to send materials to your place of residence will be granted. Perhaps they will send the protocols for revision. It is generally impossible to attract them in any way. Again, they can make decisions and limit it to the days served.
But I won’t be surprised by anything after today’s conversation with police officers at the Pulkovo police department. I was simply surprised, this is the first time in 12 years that I have encountered this. I was not allowed in for four hours. The people were placed in a cell before a detention report was drawn up. They were detained around 12 at night, and we were only given the protocols at 6 in the morning. This is a blatant violation. Among other things, the rights were not explained, including Article 51 of the Constitution (“No one is obliged to testify against himself, his spouse and close relatives, the circle of whom is determined by federal law” - editor’s note). We refused to sign this column; witnesses were invited to testify to our refusal. They did not provide me with the materials on Aleshkovsky, and also did not allow me to read the explanations and did not allow me to sign them. They ignored all my requests."