Unlawful anti-extremism in August 2018

We publish an overview of the main and most significant events in in the area of ​​misuse of anti-extremist legislation in Russia in August 2018.

Rulemaking

In early August, the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications submitted to the public discussion of the draft amendment of the federal law "On Information". TO the types of information listed in the law that are subject to blocking on demand Prosecutor General's Office extrajudicially, the department proposes to add such which contains " justification and justification for the implementation of extremist and (or) terrorist activities ". We consider undesirable and permissible only in exceptional cases extrajudicial blocking of online materials, and the proposed changes, on our view, may lead to a further increase in abuses in the area of restrictions on freedom of speech. And if the concept of "justifying terrorism" defined in the relevant article 205.2 of the Criminal Code as a public statement recognizing the ideology and practice of terrorism correct, in need of support and imitation, then the definition the concept of "substantiation and justification of extremist activity" in Russian legislation is absent, which opens the way for arbitrary his interpretation.

Practice of the ECtHR

August 28, 2018 European Court of Rights rights (ECtHR) ruled in two cases concerning the use of the Russian anti-extremist legislation, in which he recognized the violation by Russia of Art. 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protecting freedom of expression opinions.

The ECHR granted the complaint of blogger Savva Terentyev to the sentence passed against him under Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code (actions, aimed at inciting hatred on the basis of belonging to a social group, committed publicly), awarded Terentyev compensation for legal expenses, but denied him compensation for non-pecuniary damage. Terentiev, user of "LiveJournal", in 2008 was sentenced by the Syktyvkar city court to one year of imprisonment suspended sentence for leaving a comment on a local journalist's blog in which he criticized the police in harsh terms and called for the establishment of furnaces in city squares to burn "unfaithful cops" in them. Court considered that Terentiev's statement contained a call for violence against social group "policemen". Terentyev went to Estonia and received there the status of a political refugee, then moved to Austria.

ECtHR drew attention to the fact that Terentiev's comment was made during the discussion around the press release of human rights activists about the search, which took place in the editorial office a newspaper that supported an opposition candidate in an election, i.e. within the framework of the discussion on the role of the police in the suppression of political opposition during the election period campaigns. Thus, a question was raised, representing a public interest, and in such cases the restriction of freedom of expression is subject to narrow interpretation, especially in the pre-election period. From the point of view of the ECtHR, despite the fact that the blogger's statement was provocative and rude, it did not contain a call for real violence, but a metaphor expressing his desire see the militia cleansed of corrupt and abusive employees. The Strasbourg court indicated that law enforcement agencies are unlikely to can be considered an unprotected minority, a group that is the victim of persecution or discrimination. Accordingly, tolerance for offensive language is recommended, except cases where they inevitably provoke illegal actions on towards employees and put them at risk of physical abuse. In practice ECtHR, such cases appeared only in cases concerning armed conflicts, counter-terrorism and prison riots.

European the court also noted that until the moment of initiation case comment by Terentyev, who was neither a public figure nor even famous blogger, did not attract wide attention. Since the Russian courts do not explained exactly how Terentiev's act threatened public security, and generally did not assess the potential danger of his statement, their arguments cannot be considered relevant and sufficient for interference with freedom of expression. Terentyev was sentenced to probation. term, and imprisonment (even suspended) for speaking out on issues social significance - an exceptional measure, and a criminal record in itself is a serious sanction. The ECtHR came to the conclusion that the appointed Terentyev punishment did not meet the requirements of an urgent social need and was disproportionate to the stated legitimate aim. Thus, prosecution of the blogger was not necessary in a democratic society.

Same day, 28 August, the European Court of Justice issued a decision concerning the recognition of extremist in Russian writings of the Turkish theologian Said Nursi. The court ruled unanimously satisfy the relevant complaints, which were combined into one case - "Ibragim Ibragimov and others against Russia". The first complaint concerned the prohibition of fourteen works by Nursi from the collection "Risale-i Nur". The corresponding decision was made by the Koptevsky District Court of Moscow in 2007. The complaint was filed on behalf of the Nuru Badi Foundation, which published books, and its leader Ibragim Ibragimov. The Foundation was a participant in the process as a third party, as well as the Council of Muftis of Russia. Second complaint, "Unified Spiritual Administration of Muslims of the Krasnoyarsk Territory v. Russia", challenged the ban on the brochure "The Tenth Word on resurrection from the dead", also included in the collection of "Risale-i Nur". The decision to recognize the brochure as extremist was made Railway Court of Krasnoyarsk in 2010. EDUMCC was the customer of the publication brochures and participated in the case as a third party.

European Court noted that Said Nursi is a well-known Turkish Muslim theologian and commentator on the Koran, and Muslim leaders and religious scholars both inside Russia and and outside of it, it is believed that his texts are of a moderate nature and relate to to mainstream Islam that they promote open and tolerant relations between representatives of different religions, and that they condemn violence in any form. The Russian side did not provide any evidence that their spread led to any religious tensions or other negative consequences, and even more so to violence. cultural, historical, religious and other local characteristics that establish broad opportunities for regulation of interreligious relations in national legislation, not give, nevertheless, to one single country the right to prohibit its citizens access to a globally accessible, authoritative religious literature.

The ECtHR stated that judges relied entirely on expert opinion. There are 14 brochures in the decisions to ban there were no references to any fragments of these books that caused criticism, and the context of the distribution of Nursi's books and the possible negative consequences of such were not taken into account by the court. Expert opinions provided applicants, the courts refused to take into account, as well as the opinions of the heads of Muslim organizations and scholars of Islam. Concerning the process of recognition as extremist "The Tenth Word on the Resurrection from the Dead", the ECtHR noted that some disparaging words used in the book regarding followers of other faiths, and the positive characteristics of Muslims did not go beyond the permissible criticism of other religions; they were not accompanied calls for violence and cannot be construed as inciting hatred and intolerance. The desire of the author to convert the reader to his religion, to which pointed out by the Russian court, should not be regarded as a reason for the ban religious book, because the book did not impose any illegal methods achieving this goal.

Thus the ECtHR came to the conclusion that, considering cases on the recognition of Nursi's books as extremist and their prohibition, the Russian courts did not provide sufficient and relevant grounds for interference with the applicants' right to freedom of expression, guaranteed Art. 10 of the European Convention, and the intervention in this case cannot be considered necessary in a democratic society. The court ruled that Russia must pay Ibragim Ibragimov 7,500 euros as compensation moral damage.

Meanwhile, in August The federal list of extremist materials has been replenished with another four editions of the works of Nursi, the decision to ban which was accepted by the Sverdlovsk District Court of Krasnoyarsk in March and confirmed by the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court in June 2018.

Prosecution for inciting hatred and oppositional statements

At the beginning of August it became known about another case of criminal prosecution for posting pictures on social media Part 1 Art. 148 (insulting the feelings of believers) and part 1 of Art. 282 (excitement hatred) in Barnaul against 38-year-old Andrey Shasherin. According to him, he was forced to sign a statement with guilty that he deliberately posted images on VKontakte, directed against groups of persons identified by national and religious grounds, but he subsequently recanted his testimony. According to the results outpatient psychiatric examination Leninsky district court of Barnaul in in the second half of July, made a decision to send Shasherin to conduct a new examination in a psychiatric hospital, it was not possible to challenge the decision. We are not we know exactly how many memes were imputed to Shasherin, in the examination featured 36 images posted by him on the social network. It is known that one of of pictures concerned the scandal with the retouched clock in the photo of the patriarch Cyril - in the meme, Jesus Christ asks the patriarch: "Time is not can you tell me?", to which he replies obscenely. We consider persecution to be publication of atheistic memes is illegal, from our point of view, legally indefinable concept of "insulting the feelings of believers" in general should not have been included in the criminal article. Another picture characterizing Russia's policy towards Ukraine, although it had an aggressive, but satirical in nature and did not give grounds for claims. Third picture called for violence against the natives of the Caucasus.

At the end of August, it became known that a criminal case had been initiated in St. case under Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code in relation to 28-year-old Yevgeny Nikolaev, the author video blog "Diary of a Belarusian". According to the investigation, the suspect posted a comment under the video of another author, inciting hatred and degrading on the basis of national accessories. We have read the comment Nikolaev. It can be seen signs of humiliation of dignity, not only Russians as a political community, but also ethnic Russians. However, no The comment does not contain aggressive appeals. Dignity, with our point of view, does not pose a significant public danger and does not deserves criminal prosecution.

In the Kaliningrad region, charges were brought under Part 1 of Art. 282 UK (incitement of hatred or enmity or humiliation of dignity on the basis of sex) 27-year-old resident of Bagrationovsk Artur Smirnov, who was diagnosed with mental disorder. He was accused of posting on VKontakte under the pseudonym "Ankhen Nightmarish Dream Stirner" misogynistic posts. He sent similar texts to his teacher at the university – by e-mail and leaving messages on her page – which, obviously, was the reason for his expulsion and criminal prosecution. After two years of investigation, the only post left in the case was published by Smirnov on his personal page in 2014. It contains a picture of a man striking a woman, and a text in which the author, in harsh terms, speaks about women, their inherent qualities and behavior. From our point of view, Smirnov's post is not a direct call to violence, but certainly contains statements aimed at humiliating the dignity of women. humiliation we consider it an act of minor gravity, which should be excluded from the criminal article.

In the second half of the month, a feminist activist movement from Omsk, Lyubov Kalugina reported that the Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee of one from the districts of the city, a pre-investigation check is being carried out against her for initiation of a criminal case under Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code in connection with its publications in social networks "VKontakte". The reason was the statement that her posts excite hatred for men, received from a certain resident of Birobidzhan. IN At the end of July 2017, Kalugina was summoned for a conversation with the police, they took her explanation. In August 2018, during a conversation in the UK, Kalugina was told that against a criminal case may be initiated against her, in relation to 12 posts from her page examination has been carried out. The statements contained in these publications vary in degree of aggression - from rude humor to those in which you can see signs of humiliation and calls for violence against men. From our point of view, the public danger of aggressive statements radical feminists is small, because at the moment their rhetoric is not associated with any practice of actual violence. Thus, there is no need to prosecute aggressive feminist texts. However, requests to remove such content may be appropriate.

In mid-August, Alexander Byvshev, a poet from Krom, Oryol region, reported in social networks that he was interrogated in a new criminal case, which was initiated at the end of July under Part 2 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (public calls for extremist activities on the Internet). As Byvshev said, the case concerns the publication poem "Dedicated to the expansion of NATO to the east." We doubt the validity of the prosecution of Byvshev for this is a poem. Although the author resorts to militant rhetoric, he calls for expansion of NATO's borders as part of a containment strategy, and not to war with Russia. In addition, the leadership of NATO countries and the bloc itself does not belong to the audience Byvshev, and therefore it is difficult to perceive his calls as having practical meaning. Recall that Byvshev was twice convicted under Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code for the publication of poems, at the moment, a case has been opened against him again under the same Art. 282 of the Criminal Code, and also under Art. 294 of the Criminal Code (obstruction of justice); in all these cases, from our point of view, compelling grounds for criminal there was no persecution.

In August 2018, it became known that The central office of the FSB is investigating the case of the activities of publics in the social network "VKontakte" and a criminal Instagram account. matrimonial a couple from Yekaterinburg was charged under Part 2 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (public calls to extremism via the Internet) and hh. 1 and 2 Art. 282.1 of the Criminal Code (organization extremist community and participation in it); another defendant in the case Friend. On May 31, the Verkh-Isetsky District Court sent the men under arrest, they are in the Moscow pre-trial detention center "Lefortovo", and with a pregnant wife of one of them took a written undertaking not to leave. They are accused of administering publics in social networks, spreading the ideology of "A.U.E" ("Prisoner Urkagan unity"), including by promoting violence against law enforcement officers, and spreading products "with symbols of movement". The ideology of the underworld (and subculture "A.U.E.") is focused on illegal activities and conceptually incompatible with the implementation of the constitutional rights of citizens. However However, this ideology is not political and is not aimed at changing the constitutional building. Therefore, we believe that activities to popularize this ideology are not should be the subject of anti-extremist legal regulation, although in can in principle be criminalized. Perhaps for the organizers of the structures, exploiting criminal topics and inciting violence, should be a new criminal norm is provided, similar in composition to Part 1 of Art. 239 UK (creation of a public association whose activities involve violence over citizens).

In early August, the Kyzyl City Court Republic of Tuva fined local activist Oyumaa Dongak under Part 1 of Art. 20.3 Administrative Code (public display of Nazi symbols). Claims law enforcement officials called a Dongak post posted in "VKontakte" in 2015, which contained an excerpt from a contemporary interview with a German woman who participated in the activities of the Nazi Union of German girls, and a link to the interview itself. The post was illustrated with archival photo of girls waving swastika flags. Besides, police officers found a post with a photo of Hitler on the Dongak page, sitting at a table with a newspaper, the photo illustrated the post that the leader Nazi Germany was recognized as the person of the year. We believe that Dongak was wrongfully held liable. Her publications were not intended justification of the Nazi ideology, but, on the contrary, condemned it. However, the current Russian law allows punishment for displaying Nazi symbolism without regard to the context and direction of the publication.

Persecution of religious organizations and believers

In the middle of the month the Soviet District Court Krasnoyarsk sentenced a 27-year-old to two years of imprisonment Sabirjon Kabirzodu, finding him guilty of participating in the activities extremist organization "Nurcular" (part 2 of article 282.2 of the Criminal Code). We We consider unlawful both the ban on the books of the Turkish theologian Said Nursi and prohibition of the "Nurcular" association, which did not exist in Russia at all: from our point of view, there are only individual believers who study Nursi's heritage and face unjustified persecution.

On the same days, the Volga District Military Court sentenced imprisonment for hours. 2 Article. 205.5 of the Criminal Code (participation in the activities of terrorist organization) Rinat Galiullina. He was found guilty of continuing activity of the Islamic radical party "Hizb" banned in Russia ut-Tahrir". Earlier, in 2013, for involvement in the organization, Galiullin was sentenced to six and a half years in prison; in 2015, his term of imprisonment was reduced to five years. Galiullina was accused of being in prison, he conducted " collective and individual conversations with prisoners and tried to involve them in the activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir ."

In mid-August, he was arrested in Ufa Almaz Usmanov, owner of a halal product outlet. He got the status of the accused in a criminal case brought under Art. 205.5 of the Criminal Code in connection with the activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir.

We consider it wrongful to accuse followers "Hizb ut-Tahrir" in terrorism only on the basis of party activities (holding meetings, reading literature, etc.).

In August, at least two new cases under Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code for the continuation of the activities of communities of Jehovah's Witnesses, which were banned in Russia as local branches of an extremist organizations.

At the beginning of the month, the FSB of Russia on Khabarovsk Territory searched at least four Witnesses' homes Jehovah in Khabarovsk. 51-year-old Valery Moskalenko was detained the next day arrested by the court as an accused under Part 2 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (participation in activities of an extremist organization).

In the second half of August, the case under Part 1 Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code (organization of the activities of an extremist organization) was filed against three Jehovah's Witnesses from the town of Yelizovo (Kamchatsky region): spouses Konstantin and Snezhana Bazhenov and their friend, 72-year-old Vera Golden. After two days of detention, the women were ordered not to leave and proper behavior, the man was arrested by the court, but then released without choosing a measure of restraint.

In April 2017, the Supreme Court of Russia decided to recognize the Administrative Center of the Witnesses Jehovah in Russia and 395 local organizations of Jehovah's Witnesses are extremist. WITH from our point of view, this decision, which became the basis for the criminal persecution of believers had no legal basis.