Unlawful anti-extremism in March 2014

We publish an overview of the main and most significant events in the field of misuse of anti-extremist legislation in Russia in March 2014.

Rulemaking

In March, parliamentarians, apparently in the light of the conflict with Ukraine, engaged in the fight against Nazism in all its manifestations.

Back in the last days of February, a new version was submitted for consideration by the State Duma draft law of the State Duma deputy from "United Russia" Irina Yarovaya on the rehabilitation of Nazism, developed back in 2009. Recall that Yarovaya proposes to introduce a new article into the Criminal Code and punish a large fine or imprisonment for up to five years for "denying the facts established verdict of the International Military Tribunal for the trial and punishment of the main war criminals of the European Axis countries, approval of crimes, established by the said verdict, as well as the dissemination of deliberately false information about the activities of the USSR during the Second World War, combined with accused of committing the crimes established by the said verdict, committed publicly ." As in the past few years, the government gave a negative review on the draft law due to the shortcomings of the wording used by the authors and duplication of already existing prohibitions in the legislation. From our point view, if such a bill is passed, it will not bring anything new in the fight against real neo-Nazism, but due to vague wording, it can lead to a restriction of freedom of speech, primarily in historical discussion.

Senators are also hastily reviving their version draft law on the rehabilitation of Nazism, which, like Yarovaya's initiative, had earlier did not receive government support for similar reasons. Member of the Federation Council Konstantin Dobrynin said he intends to introduce his bill in the near future to the State Duma. In essence, it will practically not differ from the previous version.

At the end of March, the vice-speaker of the State Duma, a deputy from the United Russia" Sergei Zheleznyak submitted to the Duma a bill on amendments to Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (propaganda and public demonstration of Nazi paraphernalia or symbols or public display of paraphernalia or symbols of extremist organizations). From the point of view of Zheleznyak, one should punish and for propaganda, public display or propaganda-oriented sale "attributes or symbols organizations that collaborated with fascist organizations and movements, and cooperating with international or foreign organizations or their representatives denying the verdict of the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg Tribunal) or judgments of national, military or occupation tribunals, based on the verdict of the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg Tribunal)" . From our point of view, if Zheleznyak's bill with its vague terminology will be passed, law enforcement agencies will face significant challenges in determining which symbols are to be banned, since many symbols and attributes of the wartime of different countries existed in the pre-war years and are used today outside of Nazi propaganda. And now we We are faced with a large number of cases of misuse of Art. 20.3, when the factor of the presence or absence of a propaganda context is not taken into account. If the bill is passed, we can expect an increase in the number of abuses.

The bill was the pinnacle of the March legislative thought Deputy from "Fair Russia" Oleg Mikheev, providing administrative responsibility for the dissemination of information "which detracts from the merits of the dead in the defense of the Fatherland, the authority of the Russian Empire, the USSR, the Russian Federation, their armed forces " . To punish those guilty of spreading such information in the Code of Administrative Offenses, it is proposed to introduce a new art. 6.17.1, administrative penalty which should be from two to three thousand rubles for citizens, from ten thousand to 25 thousand rubles for officials and from 100 thousand rubles to 500 thousand rubles for legal entities. From our point of view, the adoption of such a law would mean a de facto ban on historical discussion and political analysis.

In addition, at the end of March it is known that following the meeting of the Council on Interethnic Relations under the President of the Russian Federation, held on October 22, 2013 year, a bill was developed "On Amendments to the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative offenses (in part for the dissemination of knowingly false and distorted information in the media"). The government proposes supplement Art. 13.21 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (violation of the order production or distribution of mass media products) part the fourth, providing for responsibility for the manufacture or dissemination of media products in which contains "knowingly untrue (false) or distorted information that caused the emergence of a conflict on racial or national grounds " . Similar offense should be punished a fine in the amount of ten thousand to thirty thousand rubles for citizens; For officials - a fine in the amount of fifty thousand to one hundred thousand rubles, for legal entities - a fine in the amount of twenty thousand to two hundred thousand rubles with confiscation of the subject of an administrative offense for all. We perform against the adoption of this bill. Usually the media do not provoke interethnic conflicts directly, but discuss (not always, restrainedly and objectively, of course) events that have already happened. Incitement takes place rather in direct contact with people or in in social networks. In addition, if we follow the logic of law, a criminal act should be punished in itself, the consequences of the crime can be taken into account when sentencing, but cannot be the sole reason for punishment.

Criminal prosecution

March 5, 2014 Magistrate's Court of Ongudaysky District The Republic of Altai recognized the former imam of the village of Kosh-Agach Serzhan Svatov guilty of organizing the activities of a banned religious Tablighi Jamaat movement under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code and sentenced him to a fine of 100 thousand rubles and a ban for two years to conduct religious activity. The case against the imam of the mosque in the village of Tashanta Khaidar-Ali Bugusynov was dismissed due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. Recall that the imams were accused of being adherents of Tablighi Jamaat, they distributed among the local inhabitants of the ideology of the movement. At the end of February, Svatov resigned as imam, explaining it is a desire to rid the local community of problems. Recall also that we We consider it unlawful to ban the Tablighi Jamaat movement, not involved in any violence or propaganda of such.

In mid-March, it became known that on February 19, 2014, residents of the Embankments Chelnov Ilnur Khafizov and Fidail Salimzyanov were sentenced to a fine of 100 thousand and 50 thousand rubles for hh. 1 and 2 Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (organization of activities extremist organization and participation in it) respectively for organizing a home madrasah, where the books of Said Nursi were studied. Khafizov and Salimzyanov were accused of that they read and discussed Islamic religious literature, including the works of the Turkish theologian Said Nursi from among the banned. Recall that we do not consider it legitimate to ban Nursi's works, since they do not contain any extreme statements, as well as a ban on the organization "Nurcular", which did not exist in Russia. Accordingly, we act against the persecution of individual believers who study Nursi's books.

March 21, 2014 it became known about the initiation of the case according to part 2 of Art. 214 (vandalism) on the fact of the action "Freedom", which took place on 23 February at the Church of the Savior on Blood in St. Petersburg. Recall that the five participants of the action in support of Euromaidan, they deployed on the Small Konyushenny Bridge, opposite the temple Savior-on-Blood, two flags (black and the state flag of Ukraine), laid out and set fire to tires and start pounding with sticks on metal sheets. Were detained and taken to the police, artist Petr Pavlensky, activist Yaroslav Gradil and anarchist Maria Alexandrova. February 25 Dzerzhinsky District Court Petersburg acquitted Pavlensky and Gradil under Part 1 of Art. 20.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (small hooliganism), and then Pavlensky was fined 10 thousand rubles in the case of Part 5 Art. 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (violation of the procedure for holding a public event. 21 March in the apartments of Pavlensky, Gradil and Aleksandrova were searched, all three were interrogated as witnesses in the case of vandalism committed by a group of persons, and equally motivated by political, ideological, racial, national or religious hatred or enmity, or on the grounds of hatred or enmity in towards any social group. It is not yet known whether participants of the "Freedom" rally, the motive of hatred, however, regardless of Therefore, we consider the initiation of this case unlawful. The promotion is not subject to definition of vandalism in the Criminal Code, since not a single building was damaged during it or structure, the property was not damaged either on public transport or in other public place. Obviously, the main material damage from the actions actionists became soot on the pavement.

Administrative persecution

In early March, the Soviet District Court of Samara found the head of the LRO "Jehovah's Witnesses of Samara" guilty of distributing prohibited literature of Jehovah's Witnesses during prayer meetings and sentenced him to a fine of 50 thousand rubles under Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. As a reminder, we consider the persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses and banning their texts for extremism as unlawful and regard these actions authorities as religious discrimination.

In mid-March, it became known that Pallasovsky the district court of the Volgograd region sentenced the owners of a local cafe "El" to a fine of 20 thousand rubles under Part 2 of Art. 6.17 Administrative Code (violation of legislation on the protection of children from information that harms their health and/or development). The reason was that with intended for visitors to computer cafes had access to prohibited information, in including extremist materials. Existing content filtering systems are ineffective and no blame can be placed on this on owners of computer clubs, Internet cafes, etc.

On the same days, the administration of St. Petersburg reported that the police of the Nevsky district were carrying out raids in order to prevent trade in "items of an extremist nature" and the confiscation of such goods. It was also reported that as a result of recent raids, the sale was A steel belt buckle from the time of the Third Reich was discovered, which can be purchased it was possible for 1.5 thousand rubles, a corresponding lawsuit was sent to the court against seller. From our point of view, in case of confiscation of antique goods the police are acting illegally. Because Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses prohibits demonstration of Nazi symbols, as well as the manufacture, sale or acquisition for the purpose of sale of Nazi paraphernalia or symbols, or paraphernalia or symbols similar to Nazi paraphernalia or symbols before degrees of confusion aimed at their propaganda, entrepreneurs, dealers in antiques bearing such symbols should be fined if they exhibit the relevant product in the windows, and oblige to remove it from the general reviews. Confiscation of the same antiques representing for the seller material value, and not a propaganda tool, is unjustified. impractical the destruction of antique objects is also presented, since they represent and historical value and can be transferred to the museum. We are convinced that Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses should not be applied to antique dealers, but to modern manufacturers of items with Nazi and neo-Nazi symbols (badges, clothes, copies of weapons, etc.) and distributors of similar products.

Prohibition of materials for extremism and other state and public actions

In March 2014, the prosecutor's office in Naberezhnye Chelny filed a lawsuit against recognition of 18 books as extremist - 17 works by Said Nursi and books by M. Weld "Islam in modern Turkey" (biographies of Nursi). The books were confiscated search of Nakia's apartment Sharifullina, defendants in the criminal case under Part 1 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (organization activities of an extremist organization), which is accused of coordinating the work "home women's madrasah", where the works of Nursi were studied. Some of these books, including "Islam in modern Turkey", has already been banned before and included in the Federal List of Extremist Materials.

In mid-March, the prosecutor's office of the Republic of Dagestan reported that the Nogai District Court recognized the brochure of A. Philips as extremist "The True Religion of Allah" and a video disc with a lecture by Khalid Yassin "Duties of a Muslim Woman" With our points of view, both Phillips' brochure and Yasin's lecture were recognized as extremist illegally. "The True Religion of Allah" - a small pamphlet about Islam, asserting the truth of Islam as a faith, but not containing any aggressive attacks against adherents of other religions. Yasin's lecture is dedicated to problems of Muslim women in the modern world, describes their rights and obligations. IN it occasionally meets Yasin's characteristic rhetoric directed against Western civilization with its values ​​alien to Muslims. However, no there are no inflammatory appeals in the lecture.

In the middle of March in Elista, under the pretext of checking "for extremism" the police seized the circulation of the newspaper "Modern Kalmykia." The police seized the circulation by entering a private apartment familiar editor-in-chief. Attempts by the editor-in-chief of the newspaper Valery Badmaev to obstruct the actions of the police led to the fact that he was delivered to the department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation for the city of Elista, where he was charged with hooliganism. Badmaev appealed against the actions of the police - an illegal intrusion into housing, death threats, illegal detention and seizure of a newspaper - in the city court. The reason for the seizure of the newspaper was the publication of an appeal in it Professor Vladimir Gorbatenko from Kyiv to the Russian public about possible entry of Russian troops into Ukraine. We did not find in this text signs of extremism. In addition, we recall that in order to check one or more copies of printed matter is sufficient, the withdrawal the entire circulation is illegal.

In March, Yandex and Rostelecom challenged the decision of the Central District Court of Khabarovsk to restrict access to the sites "Yandex.Video", "Kinopoisk", Wikipedia and several online libraries. Remember, the court ordered Rostelecom to restrict access to a number of materials recognized as extremist, and references to them, while in the court decision it says that access to the relevant sites in their entirety should be restricted by adding filtering rules on the border router IP addresses. Representative of the Central Court Khabarovsk said that the court decision refers to blocking access "to specific IP addresses where prohibited materials", and not to resources in general. Apparently, employees of the Khabarovsk court do not understand the difference between blocking by IP address and by the URL of the page. Unfortunately, Russian courts often find incompetence in matters related to the functioning of the global network.

In March the Russian authorities launched a new blocking mechanism, introduced so called "Lugovoy's law", which allowed the Prosecutor General's Office to block sites without a court order. In particular, Roskomnadzor, at the request of the Prosecutor General's Office, into a single register prohibited information, popular opposition websites "Grani.ru", Kasparov.ru and Ezhednevny Zhurnal (ej.ru) and sent providers the requirement to immediately restrict access to them. By According to the prosecutors, these sites contained calls for illegal activities and participation in mass events held in violation of the established order. At the same time, the agency did not inform the owners of the sites to which materials they have claims. Website owners are appealing the decision of the authorities in court.

The blog has also been added to the register. Alexei Navalny in LiveJournal (navalny.livejournal.com). How the prosecutor's office stated that the operation of this website violated the provisions of the court decision on the choice of a measure of restraint for a citizen, in relation to who has been prosecuted. Due to blog posts being republished Navalny was also temporarily completely blocked the website of the radio station "Echo Moscow" (echo.msk.ru). In addition, the Moscow prosecutor's office sent cautions against  violations of the law to several Russian content providers, including the owner "Live Journal" "Afishe-Rambler-SUP". Note that Navalny himself did not use the Internet and the provisions on the measure suppression did not violate, entries in his blog after he was imprisoned under house arrest and denied access to the network, laid out by his associates. Except Moreover, it is absolutely not clear what the hypothetical violation of the measure has to do with suppression to the law on extrajudicial blocking of sites, which provides for restriction of access if the published information contains "calls to riots, extremist activities, inciting interethnic and (or) interfaith strife, participation in terrorist activities, participation in public mass events held with violation of the established order " . No such claims nor The Prosecutor General's Office and Roskomnadzor did not show Navalny, respectively, the blog was blocked illegally. Moscow prosecutor's office in warning content providers indicated the presence of such calls in online groups in support for Navalny and the fact that Twitter, LiveJournal and VKontakte of Navalny himself " shape opinion on the necessity and permissibility of the said violations , "but not a single did not result in any specific infringement.

We have reason to state that, in line with our concerns, the out-of-court blocking of websites applied by the authorities broadly and arbitrarily, without regard to its exact content. Unfortunately, there is every reason to expect further expansion this practice in the near future.

In March, sanctions were applied to the Lenta.ru portal and led to the actual destruction of the publication. Roskomnadzor complained publication of the material "We are not armed forces" - interview correspondent Ilya Azar with a representative of the Ukrainian "Right sector" by Andrei Tarasenko, who announced the inevitability of a guerrilla war in in case of Russian invasion of Ukraine. The article also included a link published by the Ukrainian nationalist organization "Trident" interview with the current leader of the "Right Sector" Dmitry Yarosh. The 2008 interview is devoted to the Russian-Georgian conflict, in which Yarosh protests against the imperial policy of Russia and predicts war with "Moscow Empire" until its collapse. Roskomnadzor March 12 2014 issued a warning to the portal. After that, the owner of the holding "Afisha-Rambler-SUP", which includes Lenta.ru, Alexander Mamut, dismissed the editor-in-chief Galina Timchenko, the CEO also left her post Julia Minder publications. Mamut also demanded the dismissal of Ilya Azar. Big part of the editorial staff declared solidarity with the dismissed colleagues and readiness leave the portal. Note that if the interviewee does not resort to direct incitement, does not allow itself open calls for unlawful actions, the imposition of sanctions (even such as a warning) for his statements to the publication is disproportionate and unlawful. Meanwhile, in In an interview given by Azar, there were no such appeals. As for the interview with Yarosh, law enforcement agencies could well limit themselves to require the site administration to remove the link to it. For the destruction there was no apparent reason for the revision, and it is not surprising that it was carried out was, as usual, without the formal participation of the authorities.