The challenge is abandoned

The first sentence under the criminal article is a single picketer is a new stage of repression. How will civil society answer? How to achieve the abolition of the anti -law of Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code, the liberation of the prisoner of the conscience of Ildar Dadin, the termination of criminal cases of Vladimir Ionov, Mark Halperin, Irina Kalmykova? On a round table in the Sakharov Center, human rights activists and activists discussed an action plan.

DADINA CASE: What to do

Sergey Sharov-Delone (committee of protest actions), main speaker:

"The article contradicts everything that is possible: constitution, criminal and administrative law."

1. The norms of criminal and administrative law are conflicting, involving completely different degrees of public danger. Four times repeated violation of administrative laws (whether it is the transition of the street in an unidentified place or violation of picket rules) cannot increase the measure of public danger so that criminal liability arises.

2. The right to defense is violated: the lower procedural “thoroughness” with which administrative cases are considered, makes evidence on them unacceptable in the criminal process, which puts forward much more stringent evidence.

3. Violation of the principle of presumption of innocence.

4. Violation of the principle of justice of punishment: for the same violations, followed by the severity of the punishment (fine or administrative arrest for the first three violations and up to 5 years of the colony - for the fourth).

5. Illegal from the point of view of the Constitution, the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code is a repeated punishment for the same act.

Since all participants agreed with the assessment of the speaker, the main issue was how to withstand the application of this illegal article.

Ksenia Kostromina (Ildar Dadin’s lawyer): “I can’t legally evaluate the verdict, because for an incomprehensible reason we have not yet received the text of the court decision. I don’t know what the Duma was guided by, accepting a completely raw and slurred law. No one - neither the prosecution, nor the defense, nor the court know how to conduct the process under this article. Therefore, all those who fall under this article should file a request in the Constitutional Court. Submitted to the Constitutional Court, but he rejected our request for incomprehensible formal reasons.

Sergey Davidis (Memorial human rights center): “This is not the first case of adopting laws that violate human rights recently. We must resist the entire front. We must apply to international organizations - the European Court, the UN Human Rights Committee, PACE - in order to expand our very limited opportunities.”

Frederick Ber (Amnesty International): "We have already recognized Dadin as a prisoner of conscience. He did not violate any laws - he just stood in single pickets. We are trying to explain in his defense campaign."

Olga Romanova (“Rus Sitting”): “Every honest journalist should ask everyone who is related to this - Putin, officials, candidates in the upcoming elections from any parties - one question: what about Article 212.1 and Ildar Dadin? It should be like“ Carthagin should be destroyed! ”

Alex Synodov (human rights activist): “At all levels of international relations, the question“ What is there with Dadin? ”Should sound in the same way as the question“ And what about Marchenko or Bukovsky has once been there at the time of the USSR? ”The name Dadina should become a symbol.”

Sarah Hurst (British human rights activist): "We need to come up with a large international campaign. I propose to start a campaign for the abolition of the World Cup."

Alexander Podrabinek (publicist, former political prisoner): “The efforts of lawyers, jurists and other specialists should be. But civil society should make 95% of the effort on this issue. We must realize our right to freedom of speech, without asking for permission from the state, since it has long proved that it itself ignores the right. Actually, this method of action is non -solid, ignoring criminal laws - we will be produced. And Ildar Dadin showed. "

Alexandra Bukverev ("For Human Rights"): "I can not support the respected Alexander Podrabink in a call for some unauthorized actions. Like many people who are not ready for such a self-sacrifice, I can only offer to expand the circle of socially famous and significant persons involved in the defense of political prisoners. We must not be embarrassed to be intrusive and bring information about them about them about information about them about them Political prisoners. "

Daria Kostrina (journalist Grani.ru): “I don’t understand why the processes over Dadin and Ionov lit only the“ facets ”and Kasparov.ru. Why did the journalists not be interested in such a bright, dramatic, theatrical action, into which both sides turned the process - both the brightest personalities of the defendants, and the va -Bank in their lawlessness must also be reported to all, including ours Supporters: The defendants are not "blessed".

Eduard Rudyk (lawyer, human rights activist): "We need mass civil actions. We need to try to attract the media not from among the opposition with interesting materials on the topic of political repressions. If they are afraid to really talk about human rights violations, then at least let them talk about the people who are being planted today, some human stories."

Vitaliy Serukanov (Human Rights Movement "Progressive Law"): "There are many of us, but we are disconnected - according to political beliefs, according to various human rights structures. We need to overcome ideological and organizational disunity and create a single human rights organization or network."

Evgeny Levkovich (journalist, civil activist): "We need decisive uncertain actions. As bikers or football fans acted, defending the freedom of their comrades and having achieved success."