The activist was found guilty under Art. 280 and 205.2 of the Criminal Code.
On October 7, 2021, the Military Court of Appeal upheld the sentence handed down to Left Resistance activist Daria Polyudova. On May 31, 2021, the Second Western District Military Court found her guilty under Part 2 of Art. 205.2 of the Criminal Code (public justification of terrorism on the Internet) and Part 1 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (public calls for extremist activity) and sentenced her to six years in prison with a ban on working in the media, organizing mass events and publishing information on the Internet for four years.
The episode in connection with which Polyudova was found guilty under Part 1 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code, was initially qualified by the investigation under Part 1 of Art. 205.2 of the Criminal Code . The accusation of the activist is connected with a video recording stored in Polyudova's phone. In the video, she, in a conversation with a colleague, commented on the armed attack on the FSB building on Lubyanka, which was staged by Yevgeny Manyurov on December 19, 2019. From the point of view of the investigation, the statements of Polyudova with the approval of Manyurov's actions could be heard by the people around her. According to media reports, security guards at Detsky Mir and the Nautilus shopping center told investigators that on the day of the shooting, they saw "a woman with white hair talking about her regret that not all FSB officers were killed."
We doubt that there are sufficient grounds for bringing such an accusation. The objective side of the crime under Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (as well as Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code), implies that the statements are made publicly, that is, addressed to a group or an indefinitely wide circle of people. Despite the testimony of the guards mentioned in the media, we doubt that there were many people who heard the words of Polyudova. The subjective side of the crime is characterized by direct intent. If we are talking about a private conversation that is not intended for other people's ears, this means that Polyudova did not have criminal intent in this case either.
Accusation under Part 2 of Art. 205.2 of the Criminal Code was initially brought against Polyudova along with charges under Part 1 of Art. 280.1 of the Criminal Code (public calls for separatism). The reason for initiating this criminal case was a single picket recorded by the Gradus-TV YouTube channel, during which the activist called on the inhabitants of the Kuril Islands to hold a referendum on secession from the Russian Federation, and two publications on VKontakte. In the first post, accompanied by a map of the hypothetical collapse of Russia, Polyudova substantiated her point of view on this issue, referring to the Leninist understanding of the right of nations to self-determination. The second was a repost of another activist's post, endorsing violent separatism, citing the example of Chechen separatist armed struggle, and accompanied by a meme of Shamil Basayev.
The first post, from our point of view, in itself did not give grounds for persecution. However, the second publication did contain calls for an armed separatist struggle, while Polyudova did not distance herself from the statements made by the author of the post.
In February 2021, a criminal case under Part 1 of Art. 280.1 of the Criminal Code in relation to Polyudova was terminated .
Earlier, in December 2015, Polyudova was sentenced by the Oktyabrsky District Court of Krasnodar to two years in prison in a colony-settlement with the deprivation of the right to engage in teaching activities and work in the media; in March 2016, the regional court upheld this decision. She served Polyudov's sentence until October 2017. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) communicated her complaints about the course of the investigation and the verdict. The activist was convicted under Part 2 of Art. 280.1 of the Criminal Code for publishing a record on the social network VKontakte that ethnic Ukrainians in the Kuban demand joining Ukraine, under Part 1 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code (public calls for extremism) for a photo of a picket with a poster "Not a war with Ukraine, but a revolution in Russia" and under Part 2 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code for publishing a call to take to the square and overthrow the regime. We believe that this sentence of Polyudova was partly unlawful, partly disproportionate. Read more about our position on the first criminal case of Polyudova here .
Sources