Seven years in two pages of text

The Insider publishes a column of journalist Svetlana Prokopyeva, who is accused of public justification and promotion of terrorism (part 2 of Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code). As a sign of solidarity with the journalist, the text was also published “7 × 7”, “New Gazeta”, “Such things”, “Echo of Moscow”, “MBH Media”, “Mediazon” and “Rain”.

I (we?) - Svetlana Prokopyeva. I am a journalist, and I can plant me for seven years for "justification of terrorism."

Almost a year ago, an explosion thundered in Arkhangelsk. The explosion is unexpected, stunning-17-year-old Mikhail Zhlobitsky undermined himself at the entrance to the Arkhangelsk building of the FSB. A few seconds before he left a dying note in Telegram. He wrote that he was going on self -break, because "the FSB <was overwhelmed", he would fabricate things and tortures people. "

This explosion in Arkhangelsk became the theme of my next author's column on the Radio Echo of Moscow in Pskov. “Acting intentionally”, I wrote the text under the title of “Repression for the state”. On November 7, the program was aired, and then the text version appeared on the website of the Pskov news tape.

Almost a month passed, when PLN and Ekhu Moscow flew in warnings from Roskomnadzor-our quasi-prospector examined in my text “signs of excuses of terrorism”. In early December, administrative protocols were drawn up, which in the magistrate cost two media in 350 thousand rubles of a fine. At the same time, the Pskov Investigative Committee began verification under Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - in relation to me personally. The prospect of a criminal case was clearly loyal, but we laughed and twisted a finger at the temple. What, to hell, an excuse for terrorism? In his warnings, Roskomnadzor did not indicate a single specific phrase or even a word where there are “signs”, and could not indicate that there are no such words there. As it turned out soon, this is not important.

On February 6, I opened the door to the call, and a dozen armed people in helmets pushed me with shields to the wall in the far room. So I found out that the criminal case was still opened.

The search is a vile and humiliating procedure. Some strangers rummage in your things, others are indifferent to this. Old records, cash receipts, letters with foreign stamps - everything suddenly acquires a suspicious, criminal hue, everything requires explanation. Your things, the most important and necessary - a laptop, a telephone - become "material evidence." Your colleagues and relatives can now easily be “accomplices”.

On that day I was robbed - they took three labels, two phones, a recorder, flash drives. Six months later - they robbed again, blocking my accounts. I was just a “suspect” when I was included in the list of existing extremists and Rosfinmonitoring terrorists. Now I can’t start a bank card in my name, open a deposit or arrange a mortgage - the state deleted me from normal economic life.

They have to take away the last one - freedom - and now, on September 20, my procedural status has changed. Today I am officially accused of a crime under article 205.2, part 2 - an excuse for terrorism using the media. This is a fine of up to a million rubles or imprisonment up to seven years.

I do not admit the guilt and consider my criminal case to the banal revenge of the offended security forces. In that text, I assigned the responsibility for the Arkhangelsk explosion on them. I wrote that the repressive state waited for a response. That a cruel law enforcement policy is biting citizens. That blocked legal ways pushes the energy of protest in such a socially dangerous one.

If you are not afraid, publish a quote:

“A strong state. Strong president, strong governor. A country in which the power belongs to the security forces.

The generation to which the Arkhangelsk demolition belonged was growing in this atmosphere. They know that you cannot go to rallies - they will disperse, or even beat, then they will condemn. They know that single pickets are punishable. They see that only in a certain set of parties can you be painlessly painless, and only a certain range of opinions can be expressed without fear. This generation learned with examples that in court you can’t get in a court - the court will stamp the decision with which Comrade Major came.

The long -term restriction of political and civil freedoms created in Russia not just a non -free, but a repressive state. The state with which it is unsafe and scary to deal. "

I still think so. Moreover, in my opinion, the state only confirmed my theses with this criminal case. "Punish. To prove guilt and dry - this is their only task. Enough of the slightest formal clue so that a person is dragged into the millstones of legal proceedings. ”

I did not justify terrorism. I analyzed the causes of the attack. I tried to understand why a young guy who to live and live, decided on a crime-self-abundance. Perhaps I was mistaken in the reconstruction of his motives - and it’s good if I was mistaken! “But no one proved it.” The accusation instead of discussion is, you know, a rather primitive and gross position. This is a fist in the face in response to an oral remark.

This is a fist in the face of every journalist of our country.

You can’t know in advance which words, in which order are placed, will hurt the next security forces. They called the crime the expressed opinion. They construct a criminal out of a person who simply did his job.

According to the same principle, you can invent a criminal case from any, more or less acute text. It is enough to find “experts” who will sign the “expert opinion” necessary for the investigator. Knowing this, will you take a problem topic into the work? Do you pose questions that are surely eliminated? Do you decide to convict in the crime of the one who wears epaulets?

My criminal case is the murder of freedom of speech. Having my example before my eyes, dozens and hundreds of other journalists will not dare to tell the truth in time.