Say "let's" - crime

The reason for the criminal prosecution was the performance of Kamarkin at a rally for the resignation of the head of Karelia Alexander Khudininen on May 20 in Petrozavodsk (video is available on the Internet). The deputy proposed in connection with the fact that the federal government “does not hear” about the problems of Karelia, hold a referendum on disconnecting from the Russian Federation. The case file contains a description of the video of his speeches, reports of the operatives present at a rally and the testimony of three witnesses quoting this statement, as well as the “conclusion of a specialist” before initiating a criminal case and the “expert’s conclusion” after the case was instituted.

According to the indictment, in the specialist’s conclusion in the case of an eight days after the rally, it was said that “from the position of linguistic qualification of the statement in the speech <...> Nakavarkin <...> there is a public call to carry out actions aimed at violating the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.” The “expert’s conclusion” dated July 24 states that “ the expert linguist came to the conclusion that in the text of the text, an incentive statement called for the disconnection of the Republic of Karelia from the Russian Federation, expressed in a non-cetaconous form of proposal,” was revealed. Both of these conclusions were used by the investigation as reasons to reject the request of the lawyer Nakarkin to terminate the criminal case due to the lack of corpus delicti.

According to lawyer Natalia Kudrina, representing the interests of Kamarkina, the conclusions are almost identical and "do not carry any information." The conclusion is drawn on the basis of the single word “Come”, which the specialist and expert considered the call to violate the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, the lawyer says. She intends to initiate an independent examination. The problem is that, according to her, in Petrozavodsk there is no expert who would agree to make an independent conclusion: none of the employees of the Russian language department, where examinations are carried out by order of the investigative department, “will not risk”. Including the former: “Even not a single pensioner will go,” Kudrina claims.

For his part, the lawyer notes that Kovarkkin spoke only in front of a thousand people, which is approximately one two hundred or three hundred from the number of residents of Petrozavodsk. “In the end, he called for a referendum, which is provided for by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the international norms and the Constitution of the Republic of Karelia,” says Kudrina.

When the investigative actions were just beginning, Nakarkin had a state lawyer. However, the deputy abandoned him. “We are sitting with him at the table at the investigator,” says Nakarkin, “and suddenly a conversation went on why this is the outrage in Karelia. Here, investigator Anisimov says: “I would love to return the thirty -seventh year and with many would have figured out officials here and such as here ...” - “How are we?” - I say. - “Perhaps even with these.” I say to the lawyer: “Have you heard? Some conversations went incomprehensible about the thirty-seventh year.” He says to me: “No, I have not heard anything.” We went out into the corridor with him, I say: “What, we will continue to work if we are offered to return the thirty -seventh year and deal with us, with people like me?” He says: “Well, you see, it was he who simply expressed his opinion.” I have to him: “How further are you?” He: “Well, I actually have not heard anything.” I say: “Then we will not work with you”. ”

In a conversation with the OVD-Info , Kovarkin explained that, speaking of a referendum, he wanted to “attract Moscow attention” to what is happening in Karelia. Nakarkkin repeatedly wrote complaints and statements to various instances in connection with an extremely difficult situation with dilapidated housing in the Suoyarvsky district, but did not receive a response. According to him, “in the city of Suoyarvi, over the past twenty years, not a single square meter of housing has been built”, while representatives of the republican authorities claim that housing has been built, but they use documents about houses that local residents built on their own money are used. In addition, Nakavarkin tried to achieve an investigation of history with the loss of spare parts worth more than a million rubles. Spare parts were transferred to the storage of the Suoyarvi administration after the enterprise to which they belonged was bankrupt. Nakavarkin believes that the current head of the city Roman Petrov is involved in the theft. The deputy wrote both to the Republican Administration of the Investigative Committee and directly to the head of the UK, Alexander Bastrykin, but the case was not instituted. The day before the rally in Petrozavodsk, a film shot by Kosvarkin was laid out on the VKontakte social network, in which residents of the Suoyarvsky district complain about officials, problems with housing and work.

Pressure on Nakarkin was exerted earlier. He told the 7 × 7 publication that after his mother was taken away from his mother, they tried to start an administrative case of insulting the judge, however, after a letter to Bastrykin, the story was furious. On the blog on the site "Glass. RU ”deputy writes that the head of Suoyarvi Petrov demanded from Vasily Agafonov, the head of the West Carvelsk Electric Networks, where he worked as an electron-electronerie driver ,“ deal ”with him. Agafonov threatened Nakarkin with dismissal. In August, after the case of "calls for separatism" was instituted, Nakarkin was dismissed. The official reason is that he did not go through the medical commission, but Nakarkin claims that "another 24 people have not passed and still work."

The deputy suggests that both the criminal case and other measures taken against him are associated with his attempts to achieve investigations. He indicates, in particular, that the statements of whether the Karelia of the Russian Federation was needed was not alone, but the matter was brought only to him. Kamarkin mentioned the sensational story around the village of the Great Lip, whose inhabitants opposed the optimization of schools: "People, four hundred people, spoke out the same way as Nakarkovin." The case was really not instituted - however, the head of the village complained of residents in the FSB.

Lawyer Natalya Kudrina calls the case political. According to her, even the investigator "apologizes, says that he would never have such an accusation, but he was invented." As she suggests, the FSB or the head of the investigative department, “because our Vladimir is Vladimir as an awl in all the asses, all the time requires something , he is fiddling that the crimes are committed.” Kudrina notes that history has acquired a “not very good” resonance for the republic’s authorities: the Finnish media have already written about the case.

Of the three witnesses of the prosecution (there are no witnesses to the defense in the case of Kavarkin), one was present at the rally “as an observer”, the other as the coordinator of the Prochrevsky national liberation movement . Knavarkin says about them that these are “people in civilian clothes, dressed as FSB workers, the Investigative Committee-as it happened before, the bacons called them, you can’t call them differently .” To the third witness, chairman of the organization “Veterans of Afghanistan in the city of Petrozavodsk” Igor Kalamayev, he reacted with great sympathy. Nadarkkin is generally ready to “apologize to the Russians” for his statement. He explains that his words about the referendum were the words “a person who suffered, who went on all instances for more than two years,” and they cannot be considered a call for separatism. “It is necessary to understand that there is a Constitution of the Russian Federation, there is a constitutional court, there is a president, there is a state Duma, there is a federal meeting that will not let Nakarkin (to do this- OVD-info ). It is necessary to collect another referendum that will not be assembled. I won’t even do this, because my grandfather is buried here, he died near Leningrad, I have all the ancestors here, and how can I say that Karelia can be without a Russian Federation? It's like a bridle without a horse. It cannot be separated. ”

Nakarkin, as an accused under an “extremist article”, was faced with the fact that all his bank accounts were blocked. Like the other accused, in accordance with the already familiar practice, he was included in the list of existing terrorists and extremists of Rosfinmonitoring, after which their accounts are frozen. Nakavarkin said that he called his bank on a hot line, they did not know anything about the blocking and advised me to contact the place of residence. At first, he was informed in the local department that there was no blocking on the accounts, but then he learned from the manager that the accounts were blocked: he received a documentary explanation only after he wrote the application.

Article 280.1, which Kudrina calls far -fetched, was included in the Criminal Code at the end of December 2013 amid the events on the Maidan. Various punishments are possible for calls for violation of territorial integrity - from a fine of one hundred thousand rubles to four years in prison “with deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for the same period”; If the calls were made using the media or the Internet - up to five years (at the same time, the “occupation of certain positions” and “certain activities” are impossible for only three years). In total, it is known about four criminal cases (including the case of Nakarkin), initiated under this article. The reason in all cases was exclusively statements, and not calling for violent actions. One of the cases has already been sentenced - on September 15, 2015, the head of the Tatar Public Center Rafis Kashapov was sentenced to three years in colony (he was also accused under Article 282 of the Criminal Code to incite national hatred) for four publications on the VKontakte social network, dedicated to the situations around Crimea and the problem of Crimean Tatars. In Krasnodar, the court listens to the case of activist Daria Polyudova , accused at the same time under Art. 280.1 and 280 of the Criminal Code (calls for extremist activity) for publications in the same social networks, one of which reported that Ukrainians living in the Kuban demand an accession to Ukraine. In May 2015, the case was opened under Art. 280.1 of the Criminal Code in relation to the chairman of the Majlis of the Crimean Tatar people Refat Chubarov : the investigation claims that in an interview with the Ukrainian media, he called “to the exclusion of the Republic of Crimea from the Russian Federation and its joining to the territory of Ukraine”; Chubarov is put on the international wanted list.

In addition, shortly after the establishment of the case on Nakarkin, the case appeared, which was based on calls for a referendum - the “Army of the Army of the will of the people”. ” Participants in this prohibited organization Alexander Sokolov, Valery Parfenov and Yuri Mukhin (the first two are in jail, the third under house arrest) are accused of continuing her activities under the guise of a referendum “for responsible power” (IGPR “Call”); In the referendum, it was planned, in particular, to propose the introduction of the law on the award and punishment of representatives of the authorities for their work. The true goal of the members of the initiative group, according to the investigation, was to “shake the“ political situation ”in the Russian Federation“ towards instability, as well as the change of existing power illegally ”.