No, people should be afraid

The continuation of the Putin secret police of "investigative actions" in the case of the publication of Andrei Piontkovsky "Bomb, ready to explode" makes me return to this topic again.

The direct basis for initiating the case of "extremism" and "separatism" was this final fragment of the article by Andrei Piontkovsky:

"Not about the return of the Kadyrovsky totalitarian offshore to our Patriotic Putin" legal "field through an even more bloody third Chechen war we must think today, and about the liberation of us from the imperial obsession, which causes the third century to be expanded by shells and bombs of the land, inhabited by the most difficult people for us. Disasters can only be left for Chechnya from Russia and the release of Russia from the Chechen Republic.

I announced my full support of the position expressed by Andrei Piontkovsky in January, when the puppet Kadyrovsky “parliament” of the Chechen Republic appealed to the Prosecutor General and the Investigative Committee with the demand to institute criminal proceedings against Piontkovsky for the publication of the mentioned article. I repeat again:

1. I argue that the Chechen people have an integral right to self -determination up to the separation from the Russian Federation and the formation of their own independent state.

2. I believe that with those historical injuries that were inflicted on the Chechen people with a systematic bloody imperial colonial violence from Russia over the past two centuries, the only worthy way to overcome the unbearable situation in Russian -Chechen relations is the state landing between the Russian Federation and the Chechen Republic.

3. I recognize the right of the Chechen people if it is impossible to exercise their right to self -determination with peaceful means to exert armed resistance to the ongoing Russian occupation.

I have repeatedly expressed this position in numerous appeals, statements, letters and articles collected by me in the collection "Be damn the war!" .

The lawyer of Andrei Piontkovsky Mark Feigin says that criminal prosecution for the publication of acute -sex texts in modern Russia is madness. But this madness in modern Russia is becoming more and more everyday practice. And this practice is by no means the result of an arbitrary interpretation of the law lowered from the leash of the holding. All the latest "anti -extremist" laws were adopted precisely in order to be pursued for acute -sex texts. For a public statement of very definite judgments and assessments.

A criminal article against separatism is written precisely in order to be pursued for the statement that the Chechen people have the right to self -determination. A criminal article against the justification of terrorism is written specifically in order to prohibit talking about the justice of resistance to occupation terror. A criminal article against the rehabilitation of Nazism was written precisely in order to prohibit the Stalinist attack on Poland, and not in order to prohibit the Nazi attack.

Therefore, human rights games in the struggle against the "expansion interpretation of the law" and for its "restrictive interpretation" are unpromising. In the struggle for "clarification of vague formulations." For all the vagueness of the formulations of anti -extremist articles, they certainly allow the interpretation that their creators counted on. And "clarify the wording" can also be expandingly. If we recall that the institution of a court that can interpret the law is completely destroyed in the Russian Federation, we will finally understand the complete meaninglessness of disputes with the regime about the difference between the “appraisal judgment” and “direct appeal” - and all other casuistry.

The purpose of our anti -extremist legislation is to sow with selective repression in society and make him refuse to public discuss the most painful issues for the regime. It can be used very limited, but the very possibility of its use will generate fear and force people to be silent. The injection of fear in society is the only rational motive of absolutely meaningless from the point of view of investigating the search in the apartment of the daughter and grandson Andrei Piontkovsky.

To convince the regime to abandon these actions, one must not prove to him their legal failure and absurdity from the point of view of common sense. He just needs to show that he does not reach his goal. That he was not able to force him to be afraid and silent. Therefore, the best form of support for Andrei Piontkovsky is not the fishing of the guard on legal inconsistencies and procedural violations, but the public expression of solidarity with the position expressed by him.

You can withstand crooks and bandits only by refusing to play the rules they impose. In principle, it is necessary to abandon the game that we are striving to involve the Kremlin thimbles. In principle, to refuse to argue with them about whether our statements violate their legislation and whether it is correctly applied by investigative and judicial authorities. We consider it our integral and blood law to say that Stalin was an accomplice of Hitler to capture Poland and unleashing the Second World War, that the Chechen people should gain independence and that vile anxia of Crimea should be canceled. And we will say this regardless of how the Putin’s guard with all its spring and winter laws applies to this.

We proceed from the presumption of the guilt of the state, which set up totalitarian, fascist laws in order to pursue dissent. Laws that violate the natural human rights encroaching on our blood interests and therefore are not subject to observance. And this is not our concern, to prove to the state that it is bad to publish and apply fascist laws. This is the problem of the Putin regime - to prove to the city and the world that it is not entirely fascist.

If the Yabloko party is still not officially prohibited as extremist for its party resolution, which recognizes the annexation of Crimea illegal and requires its cancellation, then this is not because the Kremlin does not have enough “legal framework” for this. More than enough. He does not do this exclusively because he considers such a step politically inappropriate. Either he estimated the costs of such a decision as excessive, or what you thought. Choose from these two explanations to the extent of your damage, but in any case, the law in the Russian Federation is not a protection against repression for individual citizens or entire parties.

The most faithful protection against repression is the excessive cost of these repressions for the ruling click. The costs begin to grow when repression affects the blood interests of a significant public group. The only significant proof that the repressions have really affected blood interests is the presence of people who are ready for their rights and beliefs to sacrifice freedom and life.