The court sentenced Alexander Snezhkov and minor Lyubov Lizunova to imprisonment, and sent Vladislav Vishnevsky to forced labor. They were accused of vandalism and calls for extremist and terrorist activities.
On April 25, 2024, the 1st Eastern District Military Court, at a visiting session, sentenced Chita anarchists Alexander Snezhkov, Lyubov Lizunova and Vladislav Vishnevsky.
The court found Snezhkov guilty of vandalism motivated by political hatred (Part 2 of Article 214 of the Criminal Code), calls for terrorism on the Internet (Part 2 of Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code) and calls for extremism (Part 1 of Article 280 of the Criminal Code) and sentenced him to six years of imprisonment in a general regime colony.
Lizunova was found guilty of the same charges, but was not held liable under Art. 214 the court released her due to the expiration of the statute of limitations (for minors it is shorter). She was sentenced to three and a half years in prison in a correctional colony.
In the debate between the parties, the state prosecutor asked that Snezhkov be given seven years in prison, and Lizunova five.
The court sentenced Vladislav Vishnevsky (b. 2000) to one and a half years of forced labor under Part 2 of Art. 214 and part 1 of Art. 280 CC; What term the prosecutor asked him for was not specified.
The initiation of a case against the then 16-year-old Lizunova and 19-year-old Snezhkov became known in early December 2022. They were then given a written undertaking not to leave, and on December 9, 2022, both were added to the list of terrorists and extremists maintained by Rosfinmonitoring. On January 12-13, 2023, they were detained again in Omsk and Irkutsk: according to law enforcement agencies, Snezhkov tried to hide from the investigation. He was sent to a pre-trial detention center in Omsk, Lizunova was sent under house arrest in Chita. In September 2023, the case went to court, and it became known that there was a third defendant in it - Vishnevsky. On April 10, 2024, it became known that already during the consideration of the case in court, Lizunova was also placed in a pre-trial detention center for violating the conditions of house arrest.
The reason for initiating a case of vandalism against Chita anarchists was the graffiti “Death to the regime” painted on the garage on October 31, 2022. Snezhkov, Lizunova and two other people were then detained by law enforcement officers as they were leaving the garage cooperative, interrogated, their mobile phones were confiscated, and then released - however, later they nevertheless opened a case under Art. 214 CC. What was the charge under Part 1 of Art. 280 of the Criminal Code, not specified; perhaps with the same graffiti.
Charges under Art. 205.2, as reported in the media, is associated with publications in the Shugan-25 and 75ZLO Telegram channels, which were administered by Snezhkov and Lizunova. According to investigators, a number of posts posted there approved the arson of military registration and enlistment offices and sabotage on railways, the commission of which is attributed to the Combat Organization of Anarcho-Communists (BOAC).
We doubt the validity of the persecution of Chita anarchists under Part 2 of Art. 214 CC. We generally doubt the need to prosecute vandalism motivated by political hatred. In our opinion, in most of these cases we are talking about one of the forms of political criticism. At the same time, the manifestation of political hatred in itself is not criminalized, and we believe that this motive is appropriate to classify as aggravating circumstances only in articles about crimes that pose a serious public danger, namely in articles about the use of violence. Let us note that the slogan “Death to the regime” itself can be characterized as an example of abstract anti-government agitation that does not contain specific calls for violence. If the charge under Art. 280 of the Criminal Code was brought against the anarchists precisely in connection with this graffiti, we doubt its validity.
Let us add that, from our point of view, when the damage to property is not too serious, cases under Art. 214 of the Criminal Code should be terminated due to its insignificance. For those cases where this is impossible to do, but the damage is still relatively small, it would be possible to introduce into the Code of Administrative Offenses an article similar to Art. 7.17 of the Code of Administrative Offenses on the destruction or damage of someone else’s property, or clarify this article itself by including vandalism that did not cause major damage.
Charges under Art. 205.2 of the Criminal Code in this case we do not regard as unlawful.
Sources