Translated material
Savchenko and hatred
The investigator in the case of Oleg Orlov*wants to “close” not him, but the “memorial” **. The case was referred to court
Oleg Orlov. Photo: Ivan Vodopyanov / Kommersant
“Circumstances mitigating punishment: there are no. Circumstances aggravating punishment: committing a crime based on ideological enmity and hatred against any social group established by paragraph "E" of part 1 of Art. 63 of the Criminal Code ". In the new indictment in the criminal case against human rights activist Oleg Orlov (recall, he is accused of repeated discrediting the army, in the fall the Golovinsky court sentenced him to a fine, but then the Moscow City Court abolished the sentence) an amazing transformation occurred. Investigator SK Savchenko, to whom the Moscow City Court, on the appeal representation of the prosecutor's office, allowed to rewrite a carelessly sewn case, an investigator whom the Golovinsky court did not want to interrogate, no matter how the defense required this, this very investigator committed a miracle.
This is not the first time, I note: he already managed once, interrogating two different people at different times, get word from them, coincided with a comma. And before that, out of 150 million Russians, it is unmistakable to choose these two citizens who are not familiar with Orlov Mironenko and Bokhonko, anticipating that they still have something to say in his case. And not just something, but the necessary investigation.
And now - the third miracle. At the first process, exterminating circumstances and not a single aggravating one appeared over Orlov on charges of authorship of the same Savchenko. The investigator is a person procedurally independent, on him all responsibility for the course of the matter. For each word in the documents sent to the court, he vouching with his head and shoulder straps.
The independence and independence of the investigator are enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure - this is the law. How could it happen that the second process in the same fact of the same Savchenko will turn out to be the other way around? Mitting circumstances will disappear, but an aggravating will appear?
We cannot assume that, by ignoring the requirements of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the senior lieutenant of Justice wrote a new version of the indictment not independently, but under an alien dictation. Of course not! These are his personal beliefs, and not at all the spine, turned out to be so flexible that in a few months he has gained a mirror disease. And so he did not just find an aggravating circumstance (his presence will no longer allow him to appoint a 70-year-old human rights activist Orlov “overly soft” punishment). In this capacity, the Wonderworker Savchenko used the very circumstance that a couple of months ago softened Orlov’s “guilt” - his human rights work.
Compare (from the verdict of judge Kostryukova): Orlov “has been engaged in human rights activities for a long time, that the court, according to part 2 of Art. 61 of the Criminal Code, recognizes the circumstances mitigating his punishment. ”
Let me, are we mistaken, saying that now, according to Savchenko, it aggravates Orlov's guilt? No, because the rationale that Orlov went to peaceful pickets and wrote an article about the revival of fascism in Russia driven by hatred is contained in a new indictment.
Here's what Savchenko’s dexterous hands entered him (the grammar of the original is preserved):
“Analyzing the evidence, including: the testimony of Orlov, who explained that the text he published is his personal opinion, that is, the internal conviction of Orlov O.P. indicates its derogatory attitude to the Russian Federation and its citizens, including military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation; The testimony of witnesses Mironenko O.P. and Bokhonko S.A., who explained, including regarding the connection of Orlov O.P. with the non -profit organization "Memorial", the activities of which are aimed at destabilizing the internal situation in the Russian Federation, which indicates the failure of O.P. Orlov systems of views and ideas of the worldview of the Russian Federation and the leadership of the country; Decisions of the Tver District Court of Moscow, according to which Orlov O.P. Twice brought to administrative responsibility for the implementation of public actions aimed at discrediting the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in order to protect the interests of the Russian Federation and its citizens, to maintain international peace and security, which indicates its persistent hostility and intolerance in relation to the social group “Military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation”, the conclusion and testimony of the expert, the investigation believes that the O.P. Orlov, the O.P. Orlov Crime provided for. 280.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, committed by the motives of ideological enmity against traditional Russian spiritual, moral and patriotic values and hatred in relation to the social group "military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation."
What is interesting in this bulky passage, except for grammatical errors? The fact that one of the arguments of the commission of a crime based on hatred was “The connection of Orlov O.P. With the non -profit organization "Memorial". Perhaps Savchenko is not in the know, but the connection happens to the woman, but with the “organization” of Orlov is completely different - many years of work, moreover, Orlov is the co -founder of the “memorial”.
Further - more: the investigator is confident that the work of the organization - the Nobel laureate "is aimed at destabilizing the internal situation in the Russian Federation." What does Savchenko consider that? It is unknown, the accusation is unfounded. Work on documenting repression? Or drawing up a list of executioners? Restoring the memory of 100 thousand Soviet citizens (database “Lists of the Prequet”)? Or the requirement to provide housing to the “Gulag children” who continued to live in the huts of former special settlements for a long time? Or maybe the senior lieutenant Savchenko personally does not like the Federal Law “On the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repressions”, adopted on the initiative and with the active assistance of the “Memorial”? Or the efforts of human rights activists to install the monument to the victims of repression in the center of Moscow, the “Wall of Sorrow”, at the opening of which President Putin was present and performed? I am sure that this will remain unknown, because the court again will not call Savchenko for interrogation. And it’s a pity, because there is another marvelous place in the indictment:
According to the investigation, work in the "Memorial" "testifies to the failure of Orlov O.P. Systems of views and ideas of the worldview of the Russian Federation and the leadership of the country. ”
It would be nice to find out what kind of worldview the Russian Federation has and whether the discrepancy with the worldview of the country's leadership has long been criminally punished. In general, what is this discrepancy? After all, it was Vladimir Putin at the opening of the “walls of sorrow” said: “Entire classes, entire nations were subjected to persecution. The repressions did not spare neither talent, nor merits to the Motherland, nor sincere devotion to her, everyone could be far -fetched and absolutely absurd accusations. This terrible past cannot be justified by any higher so -called benefits of the people. There can be no excuses to these crimes. ”
Why does Savchenko enter an obvious lie and nonsense into the indictment? Well, firstly, its current actions do not particularly correlate with the principles of legal proceedings, among which the equality and adversaries of the parties. And what is the equality when the loser was allowed to correct errors? Let me remind you that the judge of the Moscow City Court Kupriyanova discovered that the investigation did not establish the motive for Orlov’s actions, and on this basis returned the already considered case to the prosecutor for correction. But let, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, the lack of a motive means that the investigation did not reveal the corpus delicti. And the lack of composition directly leads to the justification of the defendant - this is the law.
But instead, the prosecutor supervising the legality tells Savchenko to bring the matter to mind. He is in a hurry: on February 6, the indictment was approved by the prosecutor, and the 7th case is already in court-the agility of the unprecedented. To get acquainted with 7 volumes, Orlov was given only 6 days.
Why haste? Orlov definitely does not interfere with the elections, does not engage in politics. But the "memorial"-with its documentation of violations of human rights, authority and stubborn-is able to interfere in someone's eyes.
The passion for power by the theme of declaration by extremists of everyone in a row, including non -existent movements, in this sense is extremely worried. The condemnation of one of the leaders of the organization precisely under an extremist article (what discrediting makes the “necessary” aggravating circumstance here) is very much in the line. We will not forget that behind the bosom, the UK has one more thing against the employees of the Memorial - about the “rehabilitation of Nazism”. We note, however, that if the go -ahead for the “final solution of the issue” is received, and the case of Orlov will become one of the arguments, this will finally discredit the court and the investigation as an institution and deprive the process of the human rights activist even the minimum flawre of law.
Well, another reason to plant Orlov: the first process actually won by his defense is nonsense, negligent performers need to explain everything intelligibly so that it is disgusting.
The judge of the Golovinsky Court of Kostryukov, who appointed the penalty, apparently, already understood everything: a week ago she sent Vyacheslav Malakhov to the pre -trial detention center of the public “pre -revolutionary adviser” under the same article, which is charged with Orlov, and recognized his place of birth - Ukraine.