Unlawful anti-extremism in November 2013

We publish an overview of the main and most significant events in the field of misuse of anti-extremist legislation in Russia in November 2013.

Rulemaking

In the beginning of November The President signed a law on the introduction of a set of new anti-terrorist measures. Recall that the law provides for liability for the organization terrorist community and participation in it and for continuing activities banned terrorist organization, by analogy with anti-extremist st.st. 282.1 and 282.2 of the Criminal Code, respectively, but the punishment is provided where more severe. The law will, in particular, cover future cases involving accused of being a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamist party that could have been banned as extremist, but was illegally banned as terrorist .

Three bills were promulgated in November posing a threat to freedom of speech in Russia. Since their prospects are still unclear, we will only briefly describe them. Deputy from the faction "Fair Russia" Oleg Mikheev sent for consideration by the Supreme Court and government bill to amend Art. 282 of the Criminal Code. Offered to be included in Art. 282 of the Criminal Code an insult to patriotic feelings, which Mikheev proposes to understand it as an emotional connection between a person and a country. From our point view, the introduction of such a norm is unacceptable. Patriotic and other feelings are not can be protected by criminal law, since it is impossible to separate the guilty act from legitimate public debate.

Deputies from the faction "United Russia" Anton Romanov and Evgeny Fedorov and a deputy from the "Fair Russia" Mikhail Yemelyanov proposed to consider as a criminal any activities related to separatism, even the possession of relevant printed materials. The authors of the bill on separatism recommend amendments to a number of articles of the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative Offenses, as well as to introduce new articles into both codes; at non-violent acts are punishable by up to 20 years deprivation of liberty.

We take this legislative initiative with great concern, primarily because in this way they criminalize any, including scientific, discussions about regional policy, about secession or the annexation of the territories of the Russian Federation and even the adjustment of borders. Wherein the authors of the bill consider the use of the media and the Internet as an aggravating circumstance, and, for example, a public skeptical statement about legitimacy of belonging to the Kuril Islands can be interpreted as "doubt in the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation " and entail a punishment of up to 20 years. We are convinced that the constitutional ban on separatism should entail the criminalization of only those acts that are associated with violence.

Deputy from the LDPR faction Andrey Lugovoi submitted to the State Duma draft law on extrajudicial blocking of websites with calls for extremist actions, riots and uncoordinated public activities similar to blocking child pornography. We consider unacceptable extrajudicial blocking of materials based only on suspicions of extremism, since it will inevitably lead to arbitrariness and abuse on the part of law enforcement agencies and the attack on freedom of speech. Even with need for an urgent lockdown, law enforcement agencies should act with court sanction, which can be issued urgently, as in the case of a sanction for search or arrest. It should be noted that the Russian Association also spoke out against the bill. electronic communications (RAEC), she considered the bill untimely and contradictory Federal Law "On countering extremist activities".

Attention should be paid to that blocking calls for "participation in public mass events held in violation of the established order", obviously, can apply to announcements of any actions objectionable to the authorities, including just another not "agreed".

In November, the Russian government gave a negative review on the bill "On the inadmissibility of actions on rehabilitation of Nazism, glorification of Nazi criminals and their accomplices, Holocaust denial", included in State Duma in March 2013 by senators Konstantin Dobrynin, Boris Shpigel and Alexander Savenkov. In the response of the Cabinet of Ministers to the bill, in in particular, it is said that the concepts with which he operates - "Nazism", "Nazi criminals and their accomplices", "heroization", - in Russian legislation is not defined, and the bill itself, their meanings are also does not prescribe. In addition, the government indicated that the bill duplicates already existing articles of the Criminal and Administrative Codes. IN We generally agree with the government's response. Note, however, that Constantine Dobrynin said he intends to resubmit the bill to the State Duma after necessary improvement.

Commission on Interethnic Relations and Freedom conscience of the Public Chamber in November developed a draft appeal to the General prosecutor's office with proposals to improve the procedure for checking religious literature for signs of extremism. From our point of view, such the initiative is very relevant, given the numerous abuses law enforcement agencies in this area. The appeal was discussed with the participation representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church, Muslim and Buddhist organizations. The participants of the discussion came to the conclusion that law enforcement organs "sometimes not take into account that in the language of modern legal terms it is impossible adequately evaluate texts written many years ago and filled with specific religious meanings " . The authors of the appeal decided to ask prosecutor's office "excluded from assessment procedures for extremism ancient sacred books traditional for Russian religions, as well as other world-famous religious traditions" . The text of the document states that "other religious literature used for cult, prayer and personal purposes believers" can be studied "for compliance with its sacred texts" , but "with the involvement qualified religious experts and representatives of religious communities" .

Criminal prosecution

Chelyabinsk in November five Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters were sentenced. All of them were found guilty under Part 1 of Art. 205.1 of the Criminal Code (involvement commit crimes of a terrorist nature or otherwise facilitate their commission), part 2 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (participation in the activities of an extremist organizations), part 1 of Art. 30, art. 278 of the Criminal Code (preparation for the forcible seizure authorities). In addition, one of them was found guilty under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (organization activities of an extremist organization), and the other - under Part 1 of Art. 280 UK (public calls for extremist activities). Five convicts were sentenced to six years in prison in a penal colony regime and a fine of 150 thousand rubles with restriction of freedom for a year after release from the colony, another received six and a half years in prison followed by imprisonment for a year. We consider this verdict partially illegal. Allegations of incitement to terrorism and preparation violent seizure of power were put forward only on the basis of party activities of the defendants (meetings, distribution of literature, etc.), no no other evidence of these allegations was provided. And the sentence for the calls classified as extremist only on the basis of the video, calling for a boycott of the elections.

In November, the law enforcement agencies of the Novosibirsk region reported that the regional FSB opened a criminal case under Parts 1 and 2 of Art. 282.2 (organization of activities of an extremist organization and participation in her) in relation to five residents of the region. They are accused of being involved in activities of a cell of the banned religious organization "Tablighi Jamaat." According to investigators, the cell was headed by a citizen of Tajikistan Kamolitdin Rakhmanov, who was expelled from Russia in 2012 due to involvement in Tablighi Jamaat with the closure of entry into the country for a period at the age of five, but later returned to Russia with a fake passport. Against him, in all likelihood, a case will also be initiated under Part 2 of Art. 322 of the Criminal Code (illegal crossing the state border). The rest of the detainees are citizens Russia. We regard it as an unlawful ban on religious association "Tablighi Jamaat", which was engaged in the propaganda of Islam and was not seen in any calls for violence, and we consider the persecution unjustified his supporters.

In the last days of October in Rostov-on-Don there were initiated a criminal case under Art. 282.2 (organization of activities of extremist organization or participation in it) in relation to five Jehovah's Witnesses. They are accused that after the ban and liquidation of the Taganrog community Jehovah's Witnesses, they continued her work. The accusation is similar brought against 16 Taganrog Jehovah's Witnesses, the court the cause of which continues these days. All five defendants are under recognizance not to leave. One of the accused was prosecuted for his religious beliefs back in the years of Soviet power. We consider persecution Jehovah's Witnesses for extremism unlawful and perceive it as religious discrimination.

Mid November The investigative department of the ICR for the Tyumen region reported that the head congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses in Tobolsk (name withheld) charged according to part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code (inciting hatred and enmity) and part 1 of Art. 239 of the Criminal Code (creation religious association whose activities involve violence against citizens or otherwise causing harm to their health). He is accused of trying to prevent blood transfusion of a Jehovah's Witness victim in an accident. Supervisor community acted on the basis of the power of attorney he had regarding medical intervention, which was previously signed by the victim. Transfusion, despite this, was carried out, and the victim and her son agreed to post factum procedure. The description of the case given by the UK does not contain any information about the fact that the accused conducted oral or other propaganda in the hospital containing signs of excitation of hatred and enmity. However, he is charged with propaganda the superiority of one's religion over others, which in general cannot be regarded as an excitement hate.

In the middle of the month against the actionist Pyotr Pavlensky there were a criminal case was initiated on hooliganism under paragraph "b" part 1 of Art. 213 UK (gross violation of public order, expressing clear disrespect for society committed on the grounds of political, ideological, racial, national or religious hatred or enmity, or motivated by hatred or enmity towards any social group) on the fact of his action "Fixation" on November 10 on Red Square. Pavlensky explained the meaning performance as follows: "The naked artist, looking on their eggs nailed to the Kremlin paving stones - a metaphor for apathy, political indifference and fatalism of modern Russian society " . Which the motive of hatred can be imputed to the actionist, it is not clear at all.

Administrative persecution

IN November, the Pallasovsky District Court of the Volgograd Region recognized a resident of the village Pallasovka Valentin Shaikin guilty of an administrative offense, provided for by Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (distribution of extremist materials) and sentenced her to a fine of 2,000 rubles. Member of the community of Jehovah's Witnesses held prayer meetings in her home where they read aloud Witness literature contained in Shaikina's laptop.

In Ilek, Orenburg region, an administrative case was initiated in against the head of the local Muslim community under Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (storage in purpose of mass distribution of extremist materials). The case has been sent to judicial district of the justice of the peace of the Ilek district for consideration on the merits. The reason for the persecution was the copies found in the community unlawfully forbidden classical Muslim treatise "40 Hadiths of the Imam an-Nawawi".

Meanwhile, in Vladikavkaz they were acquitted Zaurbek Gatsalov, member of the Spiritual Administration of Muslims, son of the Mufti of the Northern Ossetia. Gatsalov was previously fined under Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses for distribution for an attempt, as part of a prisoner support program, to hand over to a convicted person a disc containing banned film Miracles of the Quran. Court second instance pointed out that the world court did not establish a correspondence between the contents of the disc confiscated from Gatsalov and a recognized extremist film. The proceedings were terminated. However, from our point of view, the film was recognized as extremist wrongfully.

Barnaul opposition activist Andrei Teslenko in November was fined by the Novoaltay City Court for thousand rubles under Art. 20.29 Administrative Code for posting a video on your page in the social network "VKontakte" "Let's remember the Rogues and Thieves their Manifesto-2002", which was published on Alexei Navalny's blog and on YouTube in October 2011. From our point view, this pre-election video calling for voting for any party except "United Russia", does not contain any signs of extremism and was illegally prohibited (recall, the video is among several materials Russian nationalists entered the Federal List of Extremist Materials under number 2066). Accordingly, the sentence of Teslenko we we consider unlawful. The activist intends to challenge this court decision.

In November, the Industrial District Court of Stavropol fined Boris Ledovsky, director of the Kvartal Plus company, providing services of a telecom operator in Stavropol, for 3 thousand rubles under Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (production and distribution of extremist materials). occasion was the fact that "Quarter Plus" did not block several sites, recognized as extremist. We consider this decision unlawful, since Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for punishment for an intentional offense, and not for an offense committed through negligence. It does not follow from the norm of the Code of Administrative Offenses that not preventing the spread can be interpreted as actual distribution.

At the end of the month, the prosecutor's office of the Perm Territory sent two cases to the court about an administrative offense 1 Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (propaganda and public demonstration of Nazi paraphernalia or symbols) in relation to the founder of the newspaper "Berezniki Rabochy" (legal entity) and editor-in-chief of the newspaper Natalya Maltseva on the fact of a public demonstration of a swastika in newspaper. November 7, 2013 in the newspaper as an illustration for article "Why are young, active, talented people called?" was photograph published in 1936, which depicted girls from "Hitler Youth" with barely noticeable swastikas on their clothes. We believe that administrative persecution of "Berezniki worker" is redundant: the photo, most likely, got into the newspaper due to the inattention of the technical employee, and the newspaper had no intention of publicly displaying Nazi symbolism (this, in particular, is evidenced by the fact that the editors promptly apologized and the number was removed from the online archive). More adequate measure in this case, it would be a warning to the newspaper.