You can't leave, you can't stay

In order not to miss the main materials of "Cold", subscribe to our instagram and telegram .

The other day, Kholod asked me to reflect on the topic of a comma in one of the main phrases of recent months: “You can’t leave, you can’t stay.” I have something to say about this, especially since September 1 marks exactly one year since I myself was forced to leave Russia. However, today's publication of the indictment in the case of journalist Ivan Safronov reminded me that an important caveat must be made in these arguments.

We have all read the material of the Project. For me, in the recent past, the head of the defense team Ivan, there are no surprises in this text. I have always said that the accusation is absurd, the Chekists are ridiculous, and Ivan is not guilty. But Vanya's tragedy itself clearly demonstrates to us that the opportunity to consider emigration today is already a privilege. Ivan was left with no choice. He was detained near his house, on his way to work, and arrested for two months. Since then, the period of his detention in the pre-trial detention center has been repeatedly extended - Safronov has been in custody for more than two years, and only this week the court will go to the deliberation room to pass the verdict.

No one knows what country Ivan would be in now if he were free. Until the spring of 2021, I also did not allow emigration for myself, and I did not leave because of fear of a guilty verdict in a criminal case. I was simply not allowed to do a normal job. On April 30, 2021, I was searched, and then they chose such a tricky preventive measure as a ban on certain actions: the use of the Internet and any means of communication, including an intercom. That is, I could not conduct email correspondence, send and receive paper letters. It was impossible even to call a taxi, find out the weather forecast, order delivery. However, these are domestic difficulties, which are nothing compared to professional ones.

The work of a lawyer is a constant search for information. Where are we looking for it? Of course, on the Internet, but this was forbidden to me. I realized that the "competent" authorities did everything to reduce my effectiveness as a professional to a minimum. The only option left to me is the ability to go anywhere without asking anyone's permission. A narrow corridor leading to the international airport.

Nevertheless, we must give the Chekists their due: they gave me time to prepare myself and prepare the people for whom I was important. The Law on the Bar and the Code of Criminal Procedure expressly prohibit lawyers from refusing to defend themselves and leaving their client. I spoke with each of my clients, including Vanya Safronov. Any of them could veto my departure. But everyone said that I would be more useful if I left.

Being useful is the main factor for me in the “leave or stay” dilemma. You cannot allow the regime to put you in jail and deprive you of your freedom, because in this case you will cease to be effective. Sitting in Russia means showing heroism, but if we are thinking about the future of the country, then what is the point of such heroism?

With each landing, we lose a fighter, a colleague who could continue to work. This is very sensitive to the community, it becomes weak and useless. My opinion is that this should not be allowed.

Many lawyers and advocates think that they cannot do anything abroad. They have such a unique profession: he studied in Russia, worked in Russia, and if he decided to leave, he had to retrain. Let me clarify: if the goal is to become a foreign lawyer, then yes, you need to get a separate education at an appropriate foreign university, but if it is important for a lawyer to remain useful specifically for Russia, then it is not necessary to retrain. Yes, you can’t go to court with your feet, you can’t pay a visit to the investigator, you can’t visit your client in a colony or pre-trial detention center, but, on the other hand, there are still people in Russia who can perform these functions, but are deprived of the opportunity to publicly speak the truth. It turns out that one lawyer can work more effectively in his own country, the other - in exile, and together you form a full-fledged combat unit.

In addition, most of the work of a lawyer or lawyer is the preparation of written documents, and this can be done anywhere, if only there was the Internet. So, having left Russia, until was suspended my legal status , I continued to help my clients. Colleagues who were directly involved in investigative actions and court hearings remained in Russia. I was assigned a coordinating function in the defense team for each case. In addition, I could take part in the direct preparation of procedural defense documents (complaints, statements, motions, etc.). Now this is also impossible, but no one will forbid me to share my professional experience with colleagues.

All my projects were built on an alliance of lawyers, journalists and civil activists. About the first I have already said, I will add a few words about the rest. Of course, it is important for journalists to work with sources. But, colleagues, honestly, how often have you met with the heroes of your materials physically lately? We call up, correspond, send documents to each other. The coronavirus has taught us to work remotely, but now isolation has been replaced by emigration — the work of the same “Project” proves that everything is possible. Many media outlets that had to leave Russia have successfully restarted abroad and have not lost their audience. And now they influence the future of Russia much more than those who remained in the country, but are forced to submit to censorship.

The main weapon of civil activists is the word. But where are the words loudest now? Of course, not on the streets or offline events that can no longer be held in Russia, but on the Internet. Expats, again, have much more opportunities to disseminate information than those who stayed in Russia.

In addition, I want to emphasize that emigration now and emigration at the beginning of the last century are two different entities. Then the departure crossed out a person from the information agenda of the country and public life. A hundred years ago there was no television, the Internet, mobile communications. Today, having left, you can maintain all ties with your country and really influence what is happening in it. Here are my thoughts on emigration, in which I myself have been staying for exactly a year. Perhaps they will be useful to someone. Perhaps someone who has read this text is considering leaving right now, weighing all the pros and cons. In any case, now these people have the most important thing - the opportunity to choose. Many, like Vanya Safronov, did not have it either.