Direct speech

Zoya Svetova , The New Times:

There is a preliminary hearing today, and the judge will set a date for hearing the case on the merits. Most likely, this date will help to understand when Judge Nikishina will announce his decision on the Bolotnaya case. She herself will announce this tomorrow, when she leaves for the verdict. These two cases are connected: the case of mass riots on Bolotnaya, which is now being considered in the Zamoskvoretsky court and which is coming to an end, and the case of “Anatomy of Protest-2”. Udaltsov and Razvozzhaev are accused of being the organizers of the “March of Millions” on May 6, 2012 and that they did it with the money of Givi Targamadze. We know very well the whole story of Leonid Razvozhaev, who, frightened of a possible arrest, went to Kiev and wanted to ask for political asylum there, but security officers kidnapped him, kept him in the basement, put quite strong psychological pressure on him and forced him to admit everything that then easily became the basis of this case and was shown in the film “Anatomy of a Protest 2”. That Udaltsov, Razvozzhaev and Targamadze were planning the “March of Millions” and other protests in Russia.

Of course, the case will be considered in an accusatory manner and there will be a guilty verdict. We know that Konstantin Lebedev, who, according to the investigation, was one of the participants in the meetings with Targamadze, has already been sentenced in a special manner after he admitted his guilt. He testified against Udaltsov and Razvozzhaev, received a sentence of 2.5 years and has now already asked for parole from the Lefortovo pre-trial detention center; most likely, his request will be fulfilled. He will be a witness at the trial, and, I am sure, he will confirm his previously given testimony, because these were the terms of the deal, the conditions that he would receive not the 10 years that he was threatened with as an organizer, but 2.5 years, which he was quite comfortable with I sat in a cell in the Lefortovo prison, in solitary confinement, just as I wanted.

It is very difficult to say what the deadlines will be until we know what the deadlines await the participants in the so-called “mass riots.” The Olympics will pass, and it’s hard to imagine what will happen next. Now everyone is discussing whether they will tighten the screws, and the story with the Dozhd TV channel suggests that we should expect quite tough measures from the authorities, and we should not expect mercy for either Udaltsov or Razvozzhaev. This is evidenced by the very fact that the case came to court, although it was sent for revision to the prosecutor’s office at the end of December, when Khodorkovsky, Pussy Riot, Farber, Greenpeace activists were released, and there was hope that it would “die” there. There was a feeling of some kind of thaw, but now it is clear that all this is not so, because the case of Razvozzhaev and Udaltsov came to court, and those involved in the “Bolotnaya case” face real sentences. Maybe they will not be as severe as the prosecutor demands - from 5 to 6 years, but I am afraid that they will be real. Although we formally do not have a prejudice, in reality we still have one, and the verdict in the “Bolotnaya case” should become a prejudice to the case of Udaltsov and Razvozzhaev. Because if there is a harsh sentence for the participants of the mass riots, then the organizers should also be convicted; in our jurisprudence, this is all connected. We must wait for the decision on the “prisoners of Bolotnaya”, and then draw conclusions about what awaits Razvozzhaev and Udaltsov. Today I have a very bad feeling.

Initially, everyone condemned Razvozzhaev because he admitted his guilt. But then, when it became clear what the reasons were, this changed. They didn’t put needles under his nails, he wasn’t tortured with electric shock, but, as he told human rights activists and me, including in the Lefortovo pre-trial detention center, very strong psychological pressure was put on him, which is why he acted this way. But then he found the strength to refuse this testimony, and in this sense, I personally like him. In general, there is no consolidated position in the protest environment. Udaltsov - such as he is - was a prominent figure, and although one may not share his beliefs, he was a bright personality, did not compromise with the authorities, called for protests, direct actions, and called for unauthorized rallies. And due to the fact that they are now in the dock, there is such a sympathetic attitude towards them.

It is clear that this whole story with Targamadze is very strange. Although Targamadze says that he was not there, I have no answers, I don’t know what happened there. And to be honest, of course, in a sense, Udaltsov and Razvozzhaev were set up, because if the filming of “Anatomy of a Protest” is real, and not just an edit, and they were actually engaged in some kind of activity, communicating with foreign politicians, then they they had to understand that they were being watched. This whole “Anatomy of Protest,” the story of Razvozzhaev and Udaltsov, is, of course, very upsetting, because it’s clear that people didn’t think about the consequences at all. They embarked on revolutionary activities, completely forgetting about the laws of conspiracy, and this is sad. The story with Lebedev also dealt a very big blow to the opposition movement, because it turned out that the man had mortgaged all his friends, believing that this was the only opportunity to avoid imprisonment for 10 years. But I treat all this with understanding, because it was all already in the dissident movement. It’s not for nothing that this case is compared to the case of Krasin and Yakir, and there was even a film by Andrei Loshak dedicated to this. We learned a lot from this story and film about how everything works in the preparation of opposition actions, and we saw that the new Russian revolutionaries are very infantile. But they pay for it with their lives and their fate, they are in prison and, quite possibly, will remain there for a long time, so no one can condemn them, since no one knows what he would have done in their place.