Translated material
Dates and hatred
Oleg Orlov* sentenced to 2 years and 6 months of the colony for repeated "discrediting the army"
Oleg Orlov at the court. Photo: Svetlana Vidanova / "New Gazeta"
2 years and 6 months of the colony - such a sentence was appointed by Judge Elena Astakhova to human rights activist Oleg Orlov* in the case of re -discrediting the army.
We followed this process from the first day - from June 8, when the Golovinsky District Court held the first meeting. The accusation is not at all unique - articles on “discrediting” become folk. Since the beginning of March 2022, at least 8055 administrative cases have been received by Russian courts, 81 criminal ones were instituted. Almost any critical statement about the military operation in Ukraine falls under them, with the exception of the speeches of the late owner of the Wagner PMC Evgeny Prigozhin.
Article 280.3 was introduced in the Criminal Code on March 4, 2022 and became almost the first reaction of the legislator to his. The authors are deputies Volodin, Zyuganov, Zhirinovsky, Neverov, Mironov, Melnikov, Zhukov, Isaev, Tolstoy and Senator Matvienko. The criminal article has become an addition to the administrative. That is, the criminal can receive one who already has a fine for anti -war statements and continues to protest.
The administrative article was introduced so hastily that with the help of the dexterity of the hands they avoided the first reading - they inscribed amendments to a long time and languidly lying in the Duma a draft law on liability for money laundering. The Duma “hawks” were their authors: Piskarev, Kartapolov, Alshevskikh, Butina, Lugovoi, Nilov.
Under this article, Orlov was fined twice - for two peaceful pickets. The reason for the initiation of the criminal was the translation of his article in the French magazine Mediapart, published by him on the social network. The article was called "they wanted fascism - they received it." They excited, although the article is not about the army at all.
The case was opened in March 2023 - on the day when the Memorial ** and its members were searches. Investigator of the SK Ilya Savchenko sent an article by Orlov for examination at the ANO Center for Sociocultural Expertise. The examination was made by Kryukov and Tarasov. These surnames are familiar to those who follow the chronicle of repression. Dmitrieva’s affairs, Pussy Rayot, Agnes Khaikar, “Jehovah's Witnesses” ***, the case of the liquidation of the Memorial human rights center and the whole list of anti -war cases contain the conclusions of these citizens made in various fields of knowledge - from sexology to religious studies. By the education of Kryukov, a mathematician (but seems to be a cultural scientist), and Tarasov is a translator from German. In the case of Orlov, they built a linguistic examination. It contains dozens of grammatical errors, plagiarism and just stupid things like a link to the "Star Wars" film epic.
Savchenko also found two witnesses: “Veterans of Russia” by Mironenko and Bokhonko, the protocols of the interrogations of which a comma coincide in a comma and who did not see Orlov himself in the eyes. That, in fact, is all.
With these evidence, it is difficult to “resist” in court. And the case sprinkled. The defense of Orlov brought a lot of witnesses and experts who defeated the entire concept of the prosecution. Then the interests of the human rights activist were represented by lawyer Katerina Tertukhina and the co -founder of the “New” Dmitry Muratov*. This business brought him a “star” - on the eve of the debate, the Ministry of Justice declared him a “foreign agent”. It is difficult to consider this differently than the pressure on the court, because on the eve of the second process the same status was assigned to Orlov himself. But first about the first.
That court turned out to be competitive. And the state prosecution in the person of Svetlana Kildisheva simply could not request a real term, based on the “evidence base” of Savchenko’s work. Kildisheva asked for a fine. And the judge Kostryukova - appointed. This meant the victory of the defense, no one could count on an acquittal under such an article.
And then the prosecutor's office changed her mind.
Deputy Prosecutor Sturkin made an appeal performance in which he requested three years in prison.
Yes, the prosecutor's office appealed itself. And the Moscow City Court ate it.
Judge Kupriyanova returned the case to the prosecutor for revision. The investigation was given to correct errors, indicating that Savchenko did not even bother to establish the motive of the “crime”.
Actually, the lack of a motive is the lack of a composition of an act. That is, an excuse for rehabilitating grounds. But not in the case of Orlov. Here, even the proverb about the “enemies is the law” cannot be referred, because the law was not observed.
The fact that it was human rights defense that has become a “aggravating circumstance” obviously. In the examination of Kryukova and Tarasov, Orlov was called the “anti -Russian human rights activist”, during the interrogation of Kryukov, she showed that “the dissident movement has always been anti -state.” The witness of the prosecution of Mironenko during interrogation in court insisted that the subversive work of the “memorial” was the reason for the collapse of the USSR.
By the way, it was the “Russian veterans” who previously initiated the process on the liquidation of a human rights organization. During the trial of Orlov in the telegram channel of Mironenko, he left the following record:
“Veterans of Russia” are ready to begin the political process over liberalism in Russia, so that all these human rights defenders appear before Russian justice as enemies of the people for state treason. ”
Finally, in the appeal of Sturkin, it is written that after the liquidation of the organization, Orlov "continues activities in a similar society aimed at undermining the stability of civil society." That is, it is clear why they revenge - for documenting repression in the first place.
During the investigation, Savchenko rudely violated the requirements of the Plenum of the Supreme Court and supplemented the case materials with a new examination and interrogation of a new expert. This is an employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Zuev, a specialist in the field of identification of persons according to phonograms of speech, which does not have certification for the right to independently produce examinations of speech activity products. She saw the connection of the text of the article by Orlov with the army of Russia in the mention of Vladimir Putin. Since he is the commander in chief, then, criticizing him, Orlov in his face criticizes an entire army.
And then the case with this strange patch was re -went to court. Judge Astakhova first stated that Muratov was a “self -proclaimed defender” and halved the defense. Orlov in response said that he refused to protect himself - and the whole process read Kafka. It seems that I did not read it - the case was laid in three meetings.
So Vorobyov’s prosecutor did not manage to explain where the motive of “political hatred” came from. This is an aggravating circumstance, it must be proved. But, apparently, they did not have time, they cost a declaration in the debate.
Orlov hates allegedly immediately and all military personnel (it does not matter that he risked himself, saving Russian soldiers from Chechen captivity) and the "spiritual and moral values of the Russian Federation." What kind of values are these remains unknown.
They did without the analysis of Orlov’s article itself. Only the headline was quoted in court: "They wanted fascism - they received it." It is not known what words and phrases from it, according to the investigation, discredited the army and, in addition, violate the rights of “as a whole of citizens of the Russian Federation” (the words of the prosecutor Vorobyeva).
The unproven motive for political hatred, which aggravates guilt, allowed Vorobyeva to demand for Orlov a real term in the colony: 2 years and 11 months.
The maximum possible period for this article is 3 years.
Three years for a 70-year-old man, this is a lot. Three years for opinion is in principle absurd. Article 280.3 is anti -constitutional, this was talked about both on the process and beyond.
During the first consideration of the case, Vladimir Lukin, the former Commissioner for Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation, the co-author of the current Constitution as a witness to the defense showed: “There are unchanged articles in the Constitution, which include the 29th, guaranteeing freedom of speech and thought and prohibiting censorship. The constitution is a direct action document, this article acts directly and directly. Freedom of speech can be limited, and censorship is introduced only with martial law. ” We have no martial law yet. And the law that contradicts the basic law of the country simply cannot be applied.
Another article 280.3 is discriminatory: the freedom of expression on it is limited only by opponents of their own, and supporters can do everything. This happens in the presence of dominant ideology, but it is prohibited by the Basic Law. "Follow your constitution!" - With such a slogan in 1965, Soviet dissidents reached the square. He is very forbid and now.
Oleg Orlov in the last word stated that what was happening convinces him: he was not mistaken in the forecast formulated in the same article. He listed the names of the Politzes who are slowly killed in prisons. He recalled the fate of Alexei Navalny and how the authorities are fighting with him, even dead. He talked about the stuffiness that we all feel when the state seeks to penetrate everywhere: into science, on a book shelf, in bed.
Oleg Orlov:
“The hero of Kafka does not even know what he is accused of, but, despite this, he is sentenced and executed and executed. We are formally announced in Russia, but it is impossible to understand it, remaining within the framework of law and logic. However, unlike the hero of Kafka, we understand why we are actually detained, judged, arrested, sentenced, killed. We are punished for allowing ourselves to criticize power. ”
And in the end, Oleg Orlov turned to the authors of his business:
Oleg Orlov:
“In fact, you understand everything perfectly. And not all of you are convinced supporters of the need for political repression. Sometimes you regret what you have to do. You yourself are not afraid to observe what our country is turning into, which you probably also love? It’s not scary that in this absurdity, in this anti -utopia, maybe you will have to live not only for you and your children, but also, God forbid, your grandchildren?
I have no complete confidence that the current creators and executors of Russian anti -laws, anti -constitutional laws themselves will bear judicial liability.
But the punishment will inevitably be. Their children or grandchildren will be ashamed to talk about where the fathers, mothers, grandfathers and grandmother did and what did. In my opinion, this is the worst punishment. And it is inevitable.
Well, the punishment is also inevitable to me, because in the current conditions an excuse for such an accusation is impossible. But I do not regret anything and do not repent of anything. ”