Ildar Dadin against Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code

The Constitutional Court (COP) has begun to consider the complaints of convicted activist Ildar Dadin, who requires recognition of Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code that establishes liability for repeated visits to rallies and processions that are not agreed with the authorities. "Mediazone" offers to familiarize yourself with the positions of the parties.

In his complaint, Ildar Dadin, serving a sentence for repeated participation in unauthorized street actions, demands to recognize the unconstitutional article 212.1, submitted to the Criminal Code in July 2014. He insists that the new norm creates the basis for violation of the rights guaranteed by several articles of the Constitution at once: Article 29, establishing the right to freedom of thought and word, Article 31, guaranteeing the right to freedom of peaceful assemblies, Article 50 prohibiting the same offense twice for the same offense, and Article 55 prohibiting the introduction of laws that cancel or diminish rights and freedoms of a citizen.

Dadin himself in less than six months visited three unauthorized rallies and one procession. In December 2015, he was sentenced to three years in colony, but then the Moscow City Court reduced the term by six months.

Dadina defense: the article is contrary to the Constitution

At a meeting of the KS, the lawyers Dadina - Sergey Golubok, Elena Lipzer and Ksenia Kostromina - said that the actions of the activist did not cause any real harm to anyone, but he, nevertheless, was sentenced to imprisonment. At the same time, the verdict was based on the evidence collected by the police in the absence of defenders: the materials of administrative cases regarding Dadin. According to lawyers, all this violated his right to a fair court and the right to defense, writes RBC.

“This article is criminalized by those acts whose nature and degree of public danger are incommensurable with punishment,” the Golubok lawyer summed up.

Ombudsman: The article requires clarification in the wording

According to the deputy managing manager of the Commissioner for Human Rights in Russia Ivan Solovyov, Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code requires clarification in the wording and in terms of the proportionality of sanctions of the public danger of violations.

“She (the contested norm of the Criminal Code) must be additionally considered <...> based on the requirements for the certainty of the legal norm. The accuracy of the formulations, the completeness of ensuring the rights and freedoms of man, as well as the proportionality of sanctions to the nature and degree of public danger of the act, ”RIA Novosti quotes Soloviev.

According to expert conclusions, the “changed property of the subject”, committing a new offense, is taken into account in the disputed norm, and the RIA quotes a somewhat abstract explanation of the representative of the Ombudsman. This has changed quality, Soloviev notes, and requires criminal liability. In general, the article “corresponds to the realities of today”, although it is not devoid of shortcomings, Soloviev believes.

Ministry of Internal Affairs: There is no greater danger to citizens than mass shares

It is difficult to imagine what is a great danger to citizens than mass events - rallies, demonstrations and pickets, said Gayk Maryan, the head of the Department for Protection of the Interests of the Interests of the Interests of the Interior of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Supreme Judicial authorities, said in his speech at a meeting of the KS.

“Even during mass events carried out in accordance with the law, there is a great risk that people will suffer. If the law is violated, then the rights of a huge number of citizens are violated at the same time. There is a risk of harm to health, a threat to life and property, ”Maryan said. According to Rosbalt, the representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs put as an example the practice of Western countries, where, according to his data, the law to violations of this kind is intolerant.

“Almost everywhere, criminal liability is immediately provided. At the same time, we have the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation under article 20.2 provides for only 15 days of arrest, and there - at once a year or more. So, in one leading country, I will not call it, even an agreed event can be considered prohibited. In the event that local residents believe that their calm is violated as a result of its implementation. Then the police officer asks everyone to disperse, declaring the meeting forbidden. If people have not obeyed, then they can receive up to five years in prison. And the police have the right to harm health. Here's what is spelled out in the laws of European and other developed countries. Our legislation provides for the maximum maximum attitude to this, ”Maryan explained. In this regard, the Ministry of Internal Affairs believes that criminal liability under Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code is “established by the legislator absolutely correct”.

Prosecutor General: The right to freedom of assembly is not absolute

Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code does not contradict the Constitution, said the official representative of the supervisory authority Alexander Kurenna. The right to conduct peaceful public events guaranteed by the Basic Law is not absolute and may be limited by the federal law “for constitutionally significant goals,” he explained in a conversation with Interfax

“During the criminalization of an act that has signs of an administrative offense committed repeatedly, one should not proceed from the public danger precisely the act, but from the danger of a particular person,” Kurennoy noted. Based on this, he added, “it should be concluded that Art. 212.1 of the Criminal Code does not contradict the Constitution. ”

Meanwhile, according to the Kommersant newspaper, during the meeting of the Constitutional Court, the deputy prospector Vladimir Malinovsky noted that "the repeated committing of offenses cannot be considered as a circumstance that increases the degree of danger of such actions to a level characteristic of crimes."

Ministry of Justice: Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code - constitutional, but allows the uncertainty of interpretation

The norm on criminal liability for multiple visits to rallies that are not agreed with the authorities is required by improvement, says adviser to Minister of Justice Maria Melnikova.

“We believe that, despite the fact that the design of the norm is fully consistent with the constitution, some formulations require legislative improvement,” she said at a meeting of the KS. The norm, according to her, “allows the uncertainty of interpretation”, including when calculating the number of offenses that this or that citizen committed at public events, as well as the timing of their commission.

Plenipotentiary of the Government: Article 212.1 is ridiculous, but corresponds to the constitution

The authorized representative of the government in the Constitutional Court Mikhail Barschevsky admitted that he does not like the article about repeated violations at rallies.

“From my point of view, now there is a funny construction: several administrative punishments, and then criminal punishment. And the next day the administrative is again. It turns out that the measure of public danger has increased, and the measure of responsibility decreases, ” said Barshchevsky. According to him, the design turned out to be “strange and inaccurate”, but at the same time it does not contradict the constitution.