Municipal deputy Yulia Galyamina was charged under the “Dada” article

The Investigative Committee brought charges under the “Dada” article (Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code) against municipal deputy for the Timiryazevsky district Yulia Galyamina. This was reported by OVD-Info lawyer Mikhail Biryukov, who represents her interests.

After interrogation, which lasted more than four hours, Galyamina was released on her own recognizance.

The initiation of a case against Galyamina became known on the morning of July 31 from a release from the Investigative Committee. Galyamina is accused of calling for participation in the July 15 protest against amendments to the Constitution. Previously, she was repeatedly found guilty under Article 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses - violating the procedure for conducting or participating in uncoordinated actions.

A few hours after this, security forces conducted a search at the Mundep’s dacha. “Conducting such a search, taking into account the disclosure of information about the initiation of a criminal case, cannot be delayed,” Biryukov quoted the decision on the search, noting that the department itself disclosed information about the initiation of a case.

14:50 After the search, interrogation and presentation of charges, Yuli Galyamina was taken to her apartment to conduct a search there too. The search in the apartment ended only at 2:22 a.m., according to the Mundep’s telegram channel.

• On July 15, protests against the adoption of amendments to the Constitution took place in several Russian cities. In total, according to OVD-Info, 147 people were detained at the protest in Moscow. The arrests began after the protesters, who left signatures on the petition to repeal the amendments, marched along the boulevards. We wrote in detail about the results of the protest.
• Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code attracted public attention after the only person convicted under this article, Moscow activist Ildar Dadin, reported on the torture he suffered in the colony. Dadin’s case was dismissed, he was released, and before that the Constitutional Court recommended that the article be applied only in cases where a person’s actions pose a public danger.