They are accused of continuing the activities of the banned community.
November 16, 2020 in the area of nine searches and the initiation of five criminal cases under cc. 1 and 2 Art. 282.2 (organization of activities of an extremist organization or participation in such) in relation to the inhabitants of the region, followers of the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses.
On November 17, the Gryazinsky city court took into custody 42-year-old Sergey Kretov and 46-year-old Yevgeny Reshetnikov, suspected under Part 1 of Art. 282.2. On July 15, 2021, the court softened their preventive measure. The believers were placed under house arrest until September 15, 2021 and allowed daily one-hour walks. On November 15, 2021, the investigator released Kretov and Reshetnikov on bail.
According to the UK, from the end of January to the middle of November 2020, they took active steps on the continuation of the activities of the Lipetsk banned community, "expressed in the convening of meetings, organization of religious performances and services at these meetings, carrying out preaching activities, attracting new supporters", studied religious materials recognized as extremist, collected money for the community.
67-year-old Natalya Perekatiy, as well as Svetlana Vyrezkova and Tatyana Morlang, against whom the case was initiated under Part 2 of Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code, were released from the temporary detention center after two days.
It should be recalled that in December 2019, a criminal case was initiated in Lipetsk against three Jehovah's Witnesses - Artur Netreba, Viktor Bachurin and Alexander Kostrov.
Jehovah's Witnesses accused of being involved in activity of an extremist organization is due to the fact that in April 2017 The Supreme Court of ruled Russia recognition of the Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia and 395 local religious organizations of Jehovah's Witnesses extremist. We believe that this a decision that entailed mass persecution of believers under Art. 282.2 of the Criminal Code, not had legal grounds, and we regard it as a manifestation of religious discrimination.
Sources