Direct and obvious threat

Against whom legislative initiatives are actually directed, designed to limit the right to travel outside the Russian Federation

25 years ago, citizens of the USSR received the right to travel abroad. Now some categories of Russians can lose it

There was a time when the State Duma of the sixth convocation adopted laws that limit the rights and freedoms of citizens (or even punitive), exclusively from love for children. From love for the children, several consistent attacks were drawn to freedom of speech. And the “law of Dima Yakovlev” - he is the “law of the scoundrels,” - physically killed a number of children, was also accepted out of love for children.

For some reason, they always need a keyword, a pole for the performance of shameful dances. Today such a pole is the fight against world terrorism. The topic is win -win. Is terrorism evil? Evil. Unconditional evil. And the fight against terrorism is a matter, on the contrary, is unconditionally good.

It was for the sake of fighting terrorism that she recently adopted in the first reading of the State Duma and the next package of bills proposed by Irina Yarova and the chairman of the defense and security committee Viktor Ozerov. Among other things, legislators plan to expand the list of persons who will be prohibited from leaving the territory of the Russian Federation.

“We will be forced to ride abroad!” - Having revealed to the news headlines, the townsfolk, from among those few who visited the border (and half saw only Egypt, now inaccessible, and Turkey, now half -half -ducked).

“Not everything is so scary,” lawyers hastened to console the townsfolk who were not too lazy to get acquainted with the texts of documents.

However, the story of the “exit prohibition” is an example of the fact that sometimes the townsfolk are right, and lawyers are not, and news headlines may be more important than the texts of laws.

Who is going to forbid to leave the country tireless in the production of various prohibitions of Yarovaya? Firstly, to those who have been issued an “official warning about the inadmissibility of the actions provided for by a number of articles of the Criminal Code.” Namely, “crimes against public security”, among which the terrorist attack, assistance to terrorism, public justification of terrorism, calls for terrorism, etc. Secondly, "persons with outstanding criminal record for crimes of an extremist orientation." Note, a crime of extremist orientation, for which you can get a real term, now, through the efforts of the same Yarova, may be the repost of someone else's message on the social network.

 ** The security forces just need to declare that it seems to them that you have a vicious tendency to commit terrorist attacks - and all **

The warnings have the right to endure the prosecutor's office and the FSB, and for this it is enough for them to "have information about the intention of a person to commit a crime." In other words, the security forces just need to declare that it seems to them that you have a vicious tendency to commit terrorist attacks - and that’s all. The world is closed to you, the personal iron curtain has sank.

It may even seem strange. That Russia loses people and billions in distant Syria in order to stop terrorists on distant (very distant) approaches and prevent them from getting to us. And then he suddenly decides to forbid his potential terrorists to leave the country. Bares, so to speak, for himself. But you don’t have to be surprised - there is logic. It's just a different logic.

None of the punitive laws adopted by the Sixth Duma is total - people, for example, are caught in packs for gathering in the streets in three. But as an instrument of point terror, this works completely. The list of current victims is constantly updated, without affecting the imagination of the residents of the country, remembering what a real large terror is.

However, this is not the main thing. The main thing is just news headlines that are more important than laws. The very pedaling of the topic of the “exit prohibition” is a direct threat to those whom it can scare. Relatively wealthy residents of cities who managed to acquire European habits and feel like part of a large, free, affordable world. People who try to stay away from politics, but may well be (as they were already in 2011-2012) part of a meaningful protest. This is a postcard for them, and not at all noisy about the next amendments of the spring opposition. Oppositionists already had to understand for a long time what should be prepared for any muck from the authorities. This does not need new laws - enough old ones. But those who look at the policy of the authorities already puzzled, but still do not criticize openly, they say: no, do not stick. Sit quietly. You see - our intentions are serious.

By the way, the authorities, as a rule, scares those whom he is afraid. It is important to keep in mind.

Photo: Panya Anakotmankong/Shutterstock