Unlawful anti-extremism in December 2013

We publish review of the main and most significant developments in the field of illegal enforcement of anti-extremist legislation in Russia in December 2013.

Rulemaking

December 28 President signed a law banning "propaganda of separatism", previously rapidly passed all stages of consideration in the State Duma. Article 280.1 was introduced into the Criminal Code, copying the wording of Article 280. As a matter of fact, since "a violation integrity of the Russian Federation" is part of the definition of extremist activity, public calls for such a violation and previously fell under Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (although we believed that only separatist actions connected with violence). So it is not yet clear that the new wording is "public calls for the implementation of actions aimed at violating the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, changes in the current law.

December 30 President also signed a law on the out-of-court blocking of websites calling for extremist actions, riots and even uncoordinated public events, similar to the blocking of child pornography. We believe inadmissible out-of-court blocking of materials based only on suspicion in extremism, since it will inevitably lead to arbitrariness and abuse by law enforcement agencies and attacks 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 of Electronic communications (RAEC), she considered the draft law untimely and contrary to the Federal Law "On Counteracting Extremist Activities". Presidential Council RF for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights stated that the adoption law will entail a serious infringement of constitutional rights and freedoms, will create the ground for the growth of legal nihilism and the illusion of fighting extremism instead of actually working to eradicate it.

Criminal prosecution

In early December, it became known about the excitement criminal case under Part 2 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (participation in the activities of an extremist organization) against a resident of Sayanogorsk (Republic of Khakassia) Abubakir Beives. He is suspected of trying to organize a tablighi cell in the city. Jamaat". Recall, we consider it illegal to ban the movement "Tablighi Jamaat" because its members do not preach violence and do not exist evidence that they are involved in violent practices.

In the same days it became known that in Dagestan there was a special operation was carried out within the framework of previously opened criminal cases under Part 1 of Art. 30 of the Criminal Code (preparation for a crime), art. 278 of the Criminal Code (forcible seizure of power) and part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (organization of the activities of an extremist organization). IN During the special operation, 52 people were detained, three of whom were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir. Among detainees - citizen of Kyrgyzstan Kazimzhan Sheraliev. We believe unlawful emerging practice of persecution of Hizb supporters ut-Tahrir" on charges of preparing a violent seizure of power, when these accusations are made only on the basis of their normal party activity.

At the beginning of the month it became known that the FSB Kemerovo region charged opposition blogger Stas Kalinichenko under Part 2 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (public calls for the implementation extremist activities committed with the use of mass media information) on the fact of distribution on Twitter of the leaflet "Quit walking on rallies and start to act!" with calls for the destruction of vehicles funds and property of police officers and officials. From July 2013 Stanislav Kalinichenko was a witness in a case initiated under Part 1 of Art. 280 UK (public calls for extremist activities) in fact distributing the leaflet, however, the blogger was already charged under Part 2 of Art. 2 of this article. By itself, this leaflet is, of course, inflammatory, but we consider the reclassification of the case unlawful, since from the point of view of Russian legislation, Twitter cannot be attributed to the media (and amendments equating the Internet with the media in relation to this article have not yet been finally accepted).

In mid-December, to the Tobolsk city court Tyumen region was referred to the court a criminal case under Part 1 of Art. 282 UK (inciting hatred and enmity) and Part 1 of Art. 239 of the Criminal Code (creation of a religious association whose activities involve violence against citizens or other causing harm to their health), initiated against the head Tobolsk community of Jehovah's Witnesses Ilnur Ashirmametov. He is accused of that he tried in the hospital to prevent a blood transfusion from a follower Jehovah's Witnesses, and printed and distributed banned literature Jehovah's Witnesses and conducted preaching work.

December saw a number of events related to to the case of the action of the punk band Pussy Riot in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. At the beginning of the month, the European Court of Human Rights communicated the complaint of the group members and turned to Russia with questions related to both to the conduct of the process and to its essence. In particular, the ECHR inquired whether whether criminal prosecution and sentence for an action in the Cathedral of Christ Savior, as well as the ban on Pussy videos Riot violation of the right to freedom of expression as expressed in Art. 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights.

In mid-December, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation unexpectedly decided to initiate supervisory proceedings regarding the verdict, handed down to Maria Alekhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova. The Supreme Court drew attention to the fact that the court in the verdict did not set out the facts of the case, confining himself only to pointing out the presence in the actions of Pussy Riot participants of the motive of religious hatred and enmity and did not provide evidence that they were motivated by hatred of any social group. In addition, mitigating circumstances. The case was sent back to the presidium for a new consideration. Moscow City Court.

And although on December 23 Maria Alekhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikov were released amnesty announced on December 18, as convicted under Art. 213. However, quite it is obvious that the point in their case will not be put yet.

The amnesty also affected three Nizhny Novgorod anti-fascists Pavel Krivonosov, Oleg Gembaruk and Dmitry Kolesov, who were accused in the so-called Antifa-RASH case under Part 2 of Art. 213 (hooliganism committed by an organized group of persons or related to resistance to a representative of authority). Recall this process began in Nizhny Novgorod in March 2012. Initially accused, in addition to h. 2 Article. 213 of the Criminal Code, charged with Part 2 of Art. 282.1 of the Criminal Code (participation in an extremist community), paragraph "b" part 2 of Art. 115 and p. "b" Part 2 Art. 116 (respectively, intentional infliction of minor bodily harm and beatings motivated by hatred or enmity against a social group). In March 2013, the Nizhny Novgorod District Court granted the petition of lawyers and terminated the proceedings under Part 2 of Art. 282.1, p. "b" part 2 of Art. 115 and p. "b" part 2 of Art. 116 in connection with expiration of the statute of limitations. Now, in connection with the amnesty, the charge of Part 2 Art. 213.

In total, since the beginning of 2013 , according to our information, 14 sentencing in criminal cases of an extremist orientation, which, with our points of view were wrongfully instituted. Six of them were charged involvement in the activities of organizations banned for extremism, three accusation of propaganda of hatred, enmity or humiliation of dignity; one sentenced for violent crimes, but we doubt whether that the guilt of the convicted person has been proven and that he has been justly charged with motive hate. Sentences were passed against 18 people. The main victims wrongful prosecution in 2013 were those accused of involvement in activities of Muslim organizations illegally banned in Russia – Tablighi Jamaat and the non-existent Nurcular (five sentences, nine convicted), as well as public figures and activists (five sentences, five convicted).

Administrative the pursuit

In mid-December, Nadymsky city court of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug fined 2,000 rubles imam-mukhtasib of the Nadym mosque Izmail Gazizov and 50 thousand rubles religious non-profit organization of the society of Muslims "Cathedral Mosque "Azat Safa" under Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (dissemination of extremist materials). The reason was that the mosque was in the public domain the book "40 hadiths of Imam al-Nawawi", recognized as extremist in May 2012 by the decision of Sol-Iletsky District Court and included in the Federal List of Extremist Materials. We consider unlawful the decision to recognize this classic religious treatise with extremist material and the fight against distribution of this book.

On the same days, Bereznikovsky the city court found guilty of an offense under Part 1 of Art. 20.3 Administrative Code (propaganda and public demonstration of Nazi paraphernalia or symbols or public display of paraphernalia or symbols extremist organizations) Natalya Maltseva, editor-in-chief of the Bereznikovsky Rabochiy newspaper, and the founder of the newspaper - Bereznikovsky Rabochiy LLC and fined them 1 and 10 thousand rubles, respectively. In November 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 in the administrative persecution of "Berezniki Rabochy" was not necessity: the photo, most likely, got into the newspaper due to inattention technical officer, and the newspaper had no intention of publicly displaying Nazi symbols (this, in particular, is evidenced by the fact that the editors promptly apologized, and the number was removed from the online archive). More an adequate measure in this case would be to issue a warning to the newspaper.

Civil Litigation

In mid-December, the Krasnodar Regional Court satisfied the appeal against the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court Novorossiysk dated September 17, 2013, which recognized as extremist material the book of the famous Azerbaijani religious philosopher Elmir Guliyev "Semantic translation of the Holy Quran into Russian". Recall that this the scandalous decision of the court, which had no basis, caused a public resonance throughout Russia and abroad. We wholeheartedly welcome its cancellation.

In December it became known that at the end of November 2013 the European Court of Justice Human Rights Commission communicated the complaint of the Spiritual Board of Muslims Krasnoyarsk Territory to ban the book "The Tenth Word on the Resurrection from dead" from the collection of works "Risale-i Nur" by Said Nursi. In accepting the complaint, the ECtHR, in particular, raised questions before Russia about whether Does the prohibition of the book violate Art. 9 (on freedom of thought, conscience and religion) and Art. 10 (on freedom of speech) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The book was unlawfully recognized as extremist by the decision of the Zheleznodorozhny District court of Krasnoyarsk in September 2010.

Other state and public actions

In early December, it became known that Alexey Navalny and the head of the Kirov branch of the People's alliance" Vitaly Bramm appealed to the Constitutional Court with a complaint against CPC provisions allowing law enforcement to seize items and documents when checking a crime report, even if the report was anonymous. From the point of view of Navalny and Bramm, the practice of applying Art. 144 and 176 Code of Criminal Procedure on the procedure for considering reports of a crime and the grounds for inspection procedure limits the constitutional right to possession property. The reason for applying to the Constitutional Court was the May search at the Kirov headquarters support for Navalny under the pretext of testing "for extremism", carried out after an anonymous call. Printed materials were confiscated at the headquarters, including 90,000 leaflets; the police still have not returned them to the activists. According to investigators, the materials were sent for examination at the Ministry of the Interior. An attempt by the staff of the headquarters to appeal against the actions of law enforcement officers in the court was unsuccessful: the court pointed out that the investigator is obliged accept and verify the communication of any completed or upcoming crime. Navalny and Bramm pointed out that this practice allows on a formal occasion to examine and seize the property of citizens, taking no responsibility for it. We have repeatedly emphasized that in order to check the texts for the content of signs of extremism in them one or more copies of printed materials are enough, mass seizure is possible only when the materials are recognized by the court as extremist.

In mid-December, as part of an investigation criminal case on arson of Orthodox churches in Tatarstan, initiated on Art. 205 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (terrorist act), The police of Nizhnekamsk (Republic of Tatarstan) detained a group of young people. Three of them - Rafael Zaripov, Rushan Khusnutdinov and Almaz Galeev - the police, forcing them to take the blame for this crime, subjected torture, as a result of which Zaripov and Galeev received severe injuries. Relatives of the victims managed to achieve a prosecutorial verification of information about torture. At the end of the month, the prosecutor's office stated that "in the actions of workers the police see signs of a crime under paragraph “a” part 3 of Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - abuse of power with the use of violence. " The audit materials were transferred to the investigative department for Nizhnekamsk to initiate a criminal case.