"Inoagens" will not embark on the path of correction

Why discriminatory laws can only be canceled

In the register of "foreign agents" today - 283 journalists, the media and NPOs.

Inclusion in this register means not only a humiliating requirement to accompany any publication with an indication, and in large letters, on your “foreign” status. It means real discrimination - restriction in rights and the need to follow absurd prohibitions under the threat of administrative or criminal prosecution.

At the same time, discrimination occurs in an extrajudicial manner, and attempts in court to challenge the “foreign” status, as a rule, are not outwards.

Almost everything is the same - extrajudicial and actually indistinct discrimination - means the announcement of an “undesirable organization”.

The slightest attitude or to the Constitution (even after its last year's edit), or to Russian conventions ratified by Russia, this has this. On the contrary, it violates them directly.

When the first laws on “foreign agents” were adopted, they seemed to be legislative nonsense, which could then be corrected.

Today it is clear that they are not subject to any correction in principle.

They, like the same discriminatory laws on “undesirable organizations”, can only be canceled.

Recall the background.

In the summer of 2012, the Law on NPO - Foreign Agents appeared. Such a decision of the Ministry of Justice announced non-profit organizations that receive funding from abroad and are engaged in "political activities".

At the same time, “political activity” was understood to mean almost anything: not only participation in the elections or control of them or the organization of public actions, but even the direction of appeals to state bodies and “the dissemination of opinions about the decisions carried out by these bodies and the decisions they are taking”. In other words, by “political activity” it was proposed to understand the realization of constitutional rights, and for it - to discriminate against it. To oblige all your materials (including posts on social networks) by a message about your “foreign” status and report not only about income, but also about expenses. And for the refusal to declare yourself a “ino -agent” or comply with the requirements established for them and observe prohibitions - huge fines or criminal liability.

This, however, did not seem enough legislators, and in 2017 new “affected rights” appeared - “media that perform the functions of a“ foreign agent ”. Moreover, it is essential, all four Duma factions voted for the relevant amendments to the legislation in a single impulse (big greetings to “smart voting”). And two years later, the discriminated category was supplemented by the absurd one-“individuals who perform the function of the“ media-foreign agent ”. To get into this category, it was enough to publish at least something on the network and at the same time receive funding from abroad.

However, discrimination was not limited to the duties of labeling by the stigma of “ino -agent”. “Ino -Agents” were forbidden to occupy positions in the state and municipal service and banned admission to state secrets. “NPO-Inoagents” were deprived of the right to nominate candidates for public observation commissions, conduct anti-corruption examinations and be organizers of public actions.

And finally, in 2021, this Kafkian history was supplemented by the duty of electoral associations and candidates for deputies to market themselves with the stigma of a “foreign agent” or “affiliated with a foreign agent”.

As a result, Yabloko, who put forward Andrei Pivovarov to the State Duma, was automatically obliged to give 15% of the print area in any campaign under the mention (and capslok) that the list of his candidates has “a person affiliated with a foreign agent”. And this monstrous phrase also stood in the ballot box ...

Have those who were declared a “ino -agent” tried to dispute this humiliating status? Certainly. And, as a rule, to no avail.

So, in Pskov, where the status of “foreign agents” was glued to the journalists Lyudmila Savitskaya and Denis Kamalyagin, they went to court. And in court, representatives of the Ministry of Justice ... refused to inform on the basis of what data the journalists were recognized as “media-foreigners”! Like, this is “official information” that is not subject to disclosure. The court, having listened to this anti -constitutional nonsense (Article 24 of the Constitution guarantees a citizen to familiarize themselves with the materials affecting his rights and freedom), said that he “has no reason not to trust the Ministry of Justice to the employees of the Ministry of Justice” (!).

Exactly, we note, Russian courts behave, considering the cases of detainees on public actions:

No arguments, evidence and evidence are taken into account, but the court never “has no reason to trust the testimony of police officers” ...

We summarize: the procedure for getting into the “foreign agents” is non -judicial, the decision is made by the ministry officials (and similar decisions on inclusion in the list of “undesirable organizations” leading to the actual ban on the threat of a criminal article, the Prosecutor General).

It is adopted, in fact, arbitrarily - without presenting evidence even within the framework of the relevant laws.

It is almost impossible to refute getting into the “foreign agents”, and the abandonment of so many forces them to stop activities, being under the threat of continuous inspections and huge fines for the slightest “violations”.

This is the non -legal mechanism of state discrimination of objectionable ones.

Trying to soften it is pointless.

It just needs to be canceled.