99 million Varlamov*

The sentence to the popular blogger is formally legal, but he can and should appeal him to the Constitutional Court

The judge of the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow Oksana Goryunova in absentia sentenced the journalist and the popular video blogger Ilya Varlamov* for Fakes and the failure to fulfill the duties of the “foreign agent” by 8 years in prison and a fine of 99.5 million rubles (the prosecutor asked exactly the day before).

Over the years of President Putin, the well -being of Russians, of course, increased, but not to the same extent, and there are simply no such fines in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, not to mention the Code of Administrative Offenses. Bye.

And what is there? Part 2 of Article 207.3 of the Criminal Code (it is she who is charged with Varlamov, who slanders the Russian army “based on political hatred”) provides for alternative sanctions: either imprisonment for a term of 5 to 10 years (heavier punishment), or “a fine of three to five million rubles or in the amount of wages or other income for a period of three to five years” (softer). Both punishment in one fell swoop under Art. 207.3 cannot be applied.

While the verdict has not been posted in the base of court decisions, we can only guess how the prosecutor Catherine Chepi-IP substantiated his requirements, and the judge satisfied them completely. But the only option in which the sentence looks formally legal is the next cunning combination.

Varlamov received 8 years in prison for “fakes about the army”, and this is a standard term for a heavier Art. 207.3 of the Criminal Code, and a giant fine was recovered from it under a much less difficult article 330.1 for failure to fulfill the duties of a “foreign agent”.

In a practical sense, everything looks the other way around for the convict. The state of the Russian Federation will be able to plant Varlamov no earlier than it is on its territory, but 99 million are a fine - this is sensitive if the blogger has, for example, real estate or share in Russian companies that can be recovered.

Such a course of thoughts of Chepi-IPU confirmed the Mediazona*, whose correspondent followed the process: 99.5 million rubles is supposedly a blogger’s income in 2023. The question is, who and how he considered him and whether he was given the opportunity to challenge the indicated amount through the representative? But the popular blogger could receive advertising income (it was banned on the resources of “foreign agents” only in March 2024), and, in addition to recording videos, he previously conducted a number of projects in Russia and was engaged in commercial activities.

The know-how, for the first time used in Varlamov, forms a dangerous precedent for other “foreign agents”, especially for those who left the borders of the Russian Federation.

In most cases, they are in absentia not by one, but by the same two articles as Varlamov, and this will allow the courts to combine punishments for others.

Having left Russia after the beginning of his, Varlamov organized the project “Together” to coordinate actions and help those who, just like him, left the Russian Federation. So far, “New” has not been able to contact him, but I would advise him in the logic of this project to file a complaint against the sentence to the Constitutional Court.

Despite the fact that formally the verdict is legal, there is a big question to it: in the logic of the law, the word “or” in the sanction of Article 330.1 of the Criminal Code means that the amount of income collected should still be comparable to the amount of the fine in it, the maximum amount of which is up to 300,000 rubles. And the penalty imposed on Varlamov exceeds this amount - consider it yourself - 300 times!

It is interesting how the CS will be removed in order to make the so -called refusal definition on such a complaint. The bourgeois court is also a worthy target for a blogger, but constitutional is cooler. I already see how Varlamov in his characteristic energetic manner with accurate intersperses of non -normative vocabulary (and who will forbid him?) Comments the refusal determination of the Constitutional Court against the backdrop of the Neva and the Senate building, which is now occupied by constitutional judges. And I envy him in a good way.