On August 20, 2014, unidentified people hung out the flag of Ukraine and painted a star on the spire of a high-rise building in the colors of the Ukrainian flag in Kotelnicheskaya embankment in Moscow. Four people were detained, against whom a criminal case was initiated under Part 2 of Art. 213 of the Criminal Code (hooliganism committed by a group of persons motivated by political and ideological hatred or enmity) and under Part 2 of Art. 214 of the Criminal Code (vandalism committed by a group of persons motivated by political and ideological hatred or enmity).
On the morning of August 20, 2014, unidentified people hung the flag of Ukraine and painted in the colors of the Ukrainian flag a star on the spire of a high-rise building on Kotelnicheskaya embankment in Moscow. The police arrived at the scene and arrested four people (Alexey Shirokozhukhov, Evgeny Korotkov, Alexander Pogrebov and Anna Lepeshkina) and delivered them to the Tagansky police station.
In connection with this event, a case was initiated under Part 2 of Art. 214 Criminal Code (vandalism committed by a group of persons, as well as for political, ideological, racial, national or religious hatred or enmity, or motivated by hatred or hostility towards any social group), which, on August 21, 2014, was withdrawn from the production of the department of inquiry of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Tagansky district of the capital and transferred for investigation to the Main Investigation Department of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for Moscow " due to the presence in the actions of the persons who committed this crime, signs of hooliganism committed by a group of persons prior conspiracy based on political and ideological hatred or hostility "(that is, part 2 of article 213 of the Criminal Code).
On the same day, at a court hearing where the petition for arrest was considered, it became known that the suspects were charged under two articles - and under Part 2 of Art. 213, and according to part 2 of Art. 214 of the Criminal Code (hooliganism and vandalism, respectively).
As part of the investigation, cases in the apartments of the suspects were searches. Alexander Pogrebov, Anna Lepeshkina, Evgenia Korotkova and Alexei Shirokozhukhov were placed under house arrest until October 19.
All base jumpers detained on August 20 (amateurs of jumping from with a special parachute from high objects - buildings, bridges, rocks, including from urban buildings) deny their involvement in this action and claim that there was a coincidence.
Note that a few days later, the Ukrainian roofer Grigory (Mustang Wanted) made a statement that it was he who painted the star and hung the flag on a high-rise. After that, a roofer from St. Petersburg, Vladimir Podrezov, was arrested as a proposed accomplice of the Ukrainian roofer, he (also until October) was placed under arrest in a pre-trial detention center.
The qualification of this case as hooliganism, that is, as " a gross violation of public order, expressing a clear disrespect for society ," according to the current wording of the article of the Criminal Code, raises certain doubts in us. It would be premature to assert the existence of any motive before the circumstances of the case have been clarified. The degree of public disorder is also not so obvious: it is unlikely that it is really rude. The actions of those who painted the star on the spire are not fundamentally different from the "actual artists" who paint the monuments in different colors, except that they are associated with greater danger for the performer.
It is also unclear whether this act expresses a clear disrespect for society. Apparently, for a part of society that perceives the stars on the spiers of buildings as shrines, a painted star is a sign of disrespect. But it is not known how large this part of society is. And in any case, attacks on symbols are a traditional part of public controversy. Desecration of symbols as such cannot be considered a crime, as the ECHR has repeatedly pointed out and, in relation to Art. 282 of the Criminal Code, noted the Supreme Court.
Based on the combination of these circumstances, we believe that the action should be considered more as an administrative offense (petty hooliganism, Article 20.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses) than as a criminal offense.
Sources