"Owl", open, the Ministry of Justice came

Conversation with Alexander Verkhovsky - the head of the human rights center, which is going to liquidate the lawsuit of the Ministry of Justice

On March 10, the Ministry of Justice filed a lawsuit against the liquidation of the SOVA information and analytical center, which is engaged in the study of Russian nationalism and studies violations of anti-extremist legislation. Formal occasion - the organization took events or participated not in Moscow where the office was registered. But the “owe” has been persecuted since the fall of last year: proven organizations have been written to the center, and the plots on “Russia-24” have been shown about it. And his chapter - Alexander Verkhovsky - was completely excluded after the beginning of the invasion of the Human Rights Council, whose member he has been since 2012. The New Gazeta Europe talked with Verkhovsky to find out the details of the claim and the possible reasons for this pressure on another human rights organization.

- In its statement, the owl center indicated: you knew that the Ministry of Justice filed a lawsuit against liquidation, on March 10. How did you react to him?

- At first we had a check that happened suddenly, as it should be checked. But when we received an act with a listing of these 24 events, in which the Owl did not participate in Moscow, it became, in general, it was completely clear where it was going. By this time, both the MHG and the “man and the law ” had already been eliminated. Our liquidation was only a matter of time. But I must say that the Ministry of Justice was in no hurry. He waited for our response to the act, then even took into account this answer in some way. Nevertheless, things went on as usual.

- Did you expect that you would be eliminated after the ICG was closed?

- Well, no, we did not expect this before the checks, because the claims that people participate in events outside their region can be presented, I suspect, if not every regional public organization, then every second for sure. It does not happen that people do not go beyond the region at all. It should be a completely local organization: its employees should not go anywhere in order to participate in seminars, for example. The inspectors [in the Ministry of Justice] did not cling to this [never] - and then they suddenly discovered such a method.

It is unpleasant when the organization is going to liquidate, of course. But we live in such circumstances that the liquidation of the organization is not the worst that can happen these days.

Well, we will sue. In any case, we believe that such a way of eliminating the organization is not even in relation to us, but in general - this is very wrong. If such a method enters the judicial practice, then many will have problems - and we are talking not only about organizations that pursue for political reasons, but in general about all NPOs.

- You were charged with 24 violations. What were they?

-They are almost the same: that we participated in the OSCE conference or in a seminar in some city, or in a conference in such a city. The Ministry of Justice included even one participation in the online event there. Participation in all these conferences is easily confirmed by publications on our site, so screenshots from the site are attached to the lawsuit. It’s funny, but the Ministry of Justice asked for help from Roskomnadzor, who wrote a letter to his colleagues that they had no complaints about the site, but from there they sent the same screenshots about the same events and for some reason did another serious work. The RKN employees identified by the persons of employees acting at the OSCE conferences, according to the video of these conferences and attached screenshots. I don’t understand why the security forces all this espionage mechanics, if we have already written in letters that yes, such and participated, came out. As an exercise, it is probably interesting, but what additional benefits they learned from this? I don't understand, to be honest.

- Why do you think the “owl” decided to liquidate right now? It seems that there is a real wave of liquidations of human rights organizations: first MHG, now you ...

- To be honest, I don't know. It is clear that there can not be a special pressure on the human rights sector in such a politically stressful environment. Who exactly will put this pressure on, some people behind the scenes decide. We do not know their discussions, we do not know the arguments and how these people choose the future goal. Why here is the MHG? And why then is the “man and the law ” according to such a scheme, and not some other organizations? There are many of them. Maybe there will be some more? You can dream up, of course. MHG, of course, is a very large and noticeable organization. Someone apparently wanted to close it, although this is an unreasonable policy, because members of the Moscow Helsinsky group will not cease to exist from it.

- But the liquidation of a legal entity complicates the organization's work?

“ I don't know that.” We lasted 20 years in this legal form, so we do not know whether it is more difficult to work without it. If the organization is no more, everyone must decide for himself what he wants to continue and in what form it will be. So we will find out.

- You said that attacks on the “owl” began back in September last year. Do you think this is due to the lawsuit filed?

- It was not for nothing that we wrote this in the statement, because suspicions, of course, arise. “Owl ” was not so often an object of such attacks. And then there were several performances in a row, even a whole plot was shown about us at Russia- 24 . There he is about us and about the Norwegian Committee; Although, probably, even more about them than about us. When I saw this, I thought that now the Norwegian committee would make an unwanted organization. But after the transfer, nothing happened. I thought: you never know, all sorts of stuffing are meaningless. We did not even understand what was the reason for this. Immediately after this plot, nothing happened for a while, and then suddenly began to spin. Is there a direct connection here or not? It looks like what is.

“And what could have caused these attacks?” Maybe your criticism of anti -extremist legislation or the study of Russian nationalism?

- Everything can be. But if we do not know who really made the decision, then we do not know why it was accepted. The Ministry of Justice officially acts at the request of the Moscow prosecutor's office. And how did the Moscow prosecutor's office come to this thought? Probably, someone hinted at this: say, Russian nationalists who are unhappy with us are especially those who are loyal to the authorities.

- Maybe these were “Russian veterans”?

- “Veterans of Russia ” seem to us not very important people in this story. Some citizens such as “veterans of Russia ” , of course, could write [statements] or rewrite them from someone, because the primary source is still an anonymous site. But

Our criticism of violations of anti -extremist policy could cause irritation, in the end, in the prosecutor’s office itself or in the FSB, in the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

At the same time, there were no complaints of [from the state bodies] to us [before the lawsuit on the liquidation].

-Do you notice at all that over the past year, the state’s attitude towards nationalists has somehow changed?

- No, everything is about the same way, and this is interesting, because there were always opposition groups of Russian nationalists and loyal groups of Russian nationalists. This division has survived, only the proportion has changed, because since that time, the loyal has become more noticeable and more active, and those who are against, finally calmed down, hid. But after all, the authorities also do not allow any political activity: to carry humanitarian aid to the Donbass-please, if someone wants to go to fight as a volunteer, of course, this is also possible. This is possible for everyone, not only to nationalists. But the rally is, for example, in support of the special operation. The state can conduct such a rally, but amateur groups cannot. The state does not allow this. We do not see a special political revival in this sector. The authorities do not allow this, still trying to keep everything under control even in such an unusual situation for the regime.

- Could the participation of delegates from the “Naval” in the OSCE conferences become the reason for the claim for liquidation?

- You know, many organizations came to the OSCE conference. Moreover, by the way, the NGOs regularly participated in such events, which supported the state Russian policy, they had their own performances there. The Russian authorities did not forbid anyone to go there, on the contrary, they brought people who supported the government there, and not criticized him.

The OSCE is customary to reach a consensus among all countries, and there are 57 of them. Last year, the Russian Federation did not approve the agenda. The annual conference was held, but it had to be renamed. And the Russian Federation boycotted this last conference. This really was the difference between such an event, before this was not there. But Russia does not leave the OSCE, and no one from there drives it out. It is not yet clear to me whether there is an installation at all to completely exclude international contacts on this line.

- In November last year, you were expelled from the Human Rights Council with Nikolai Svanidze and other human rights activists. Do you think this is due to pressure on the “owl”?

-This may not be connected with all this plot and a collision with the “owl ” , but this is some kind of surprisingly accurate coincidence. The prosecutor’s office on November 16 sends a request to the Ministry of Justice with a request to conduct an audit, and already indicating what to look. The prosecutors already knew the results, but since the Ministry of Justice should conduct the audit, the department said that it would do all the procedures. And the next day the presidential decree is published [on the exclusion of some members of the HRC from the Council], in which I also have.

- And what is the reason for such increased attention to you?

- This is interesting, but I do not know. It’s impossible to even guess, because there is no strong occasion that could clearly be reflected.

But I suspect that I just touched some bosses with my critical statements, apparently got them. And since now there is a certain twisting of the nuts, why not twist this one at the same time?

- A little naive question, but what do you expect from the court in the claim for the liquidation of the “owl”?

- I think we will be eliminated and then approve this in appeal. But I have a little hope that someone will be caught and will not do it. I do not think that we are so important that someone realized for us. But the very idea that the organization can be eliminated for the fact that its participants went beyond the specified region is such an easy mechanism for the elimination of public associations ... If it is established in judicial practice, then officials will use this simply for their personal needs and close half the organizations in the country not only because of politics, but for various reasons. Because this is how you want to complain about. And this is a bad idea. Do not create such precedents. But I don’t know if anyone is ready to think up this thought now and stop, or not? I'm afraid not. But suddenly yes?