Misuse of Anti-Extremism in December 2016

The following is our review of the primary and most representative events in the misuse of Russia’s anti-extremist legislation in December 2016.


Criminal prosecution

In the second half of December, the visiting session of Privolzhsky District Military Court found Tyumen blogger Alexey Kungurov guilty of justifying terrorism (Article 205.2 Part 1 of the Criminal Code). He was sentenced to two years and six months' imprisonment in a penal settlement colony. The defense intends to appeal the verdict. Kungurov – a writer, a regular author of Algorithm publishers and a former member of Igor Strelkov’s Committee of 25 – faced responsibility for the text “Whom Putin's Falcons Are Really Bombing” posted on his personal blog. According to Kungurov, the FSB objected to his allegations that Russia was actually helping the Islamic State, rather than bombing it. We view Kungurov’s verdict as inappropriate. The article “Whom Putin's Falcons Are Really Bombing” contains an analysis of the situation in the Middle East and, in our opinion, includes no incitement to terrorism. The “Memorial” Human Rights Centre has recognized Kungurov as a political prisoner.

It became known in mid-December that, a month earlier, Kaluga resident Roman Grishin became a suspect in a case of inciting ethnic hatred (Article 282 Part 1) and has been put under travel restrictions. The charges were based on the video shared by Grishin on his VKontakte page in 2014 “The New Hit from Kharkiv! This Is Rushism, Baby” set to a song by Boris Sevastyanov. In 2015, activists from Krasnodar were arrested under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code (promotion or display of Nazi symbols) for publishing on social networks video set to the same song. The song by Sevastyanov contains harsh criticism of Russia’s state propaganda and foreign policy in connection with the actions in Ukraine (the author sees them as typical for totalitarian regimes), but there are no aggressive calls in it. The visual images include Nazi symbols and emblems of the banned Movement against Illegal Immigration (DPNI). However, in this case, as in many others, display of Nazi symbols is not intended to promote Nazi ideology. We view administrative or criminal prosecution for publishing this video as inappropriate.

In the second half of December, the Investigative Committee reported that a criminal case on humiliation of human dignity of a group of people on the basis of their nationality (Article 282 Part 1) had been initiated against an English language instructor from Vladivostok. The defendant pleaded guilty and was placed under house arrest. He admitted that, while playing volleyball on the court on Naberezhnaya Street in Vladivostok on 11 July 2016, he “used phrases and idioms” humiliating the dignity of the Russians. We believe that the case was opened inappropriately. The Investigative Committee report contains no indications that the defendant had called for any aggressive actions towards the Russians or threatened them with violence; we also believe that humiliation of dignity should be removed from Article 282, since it does not pose a serious public danger. In addition, if the instructor’s statements were not made in the presence of numerous passers-by on the street but could only be heard by the conflicting parties on the court, they should not have been considered public.

A criminal case under Article 282 Part 1 (incitement of hatred or enmity) against Vladimir Timoshenko was opened in Saint Petersburg in December. According to the materials of the case, in January 2015, the defendant asked a female acquaintance to publish in one of the VKontakte communities a text “containing statements aimed at inciting hatred against a group of persons on the basis of their belonging to a social group of the law enforcement officers.” We view charges of incitement to hatred against the law enforcement officials as a social group as inappropriate, because, in our opinion, Article 282 should protect vulnerable groups, rather than the law enforcement that is protected under other articles of the Criminal Code. Timoshenko was previously convicted in the Novgorod Region in 2010 for an attempt to organize a terrorist attack (he intended to blow up a wall of the Novgorod Kremlin in order to draw attention to the problems of “Russia and the Russian people”) and spent five and a half years in a maximum security penal colony.



As part of the criminal case initiated by the investigative division of the FSB, the police conducted an operation to detain seven supporters of the Tablighi Jamaat Islamic association in Moscow; they were arrested in the second half of the month. The FSB believes that the arrested members of the cell, which was run by the “foreign emissaries,” called for unification of Muslims of the Moscow Region, and involved them in illegal activities, “conducted indoctrination of new supporters, studied forbidden literature, and discussed plans to establish “the Caliphate Islamic state” on the territory of the Russian Federation;” new members of the movement were sent to camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan for education and special training. The majority of the defendants admitted their participation in Tablighi Jamaat. One of them stated that he had visited the headquarters of the movement in India, but did not consider himself involved in extremist activity. Tablighi Jamaat international religious movement was recognized as extremist in Russia in 2009. We consider this ban inappropriate, because Tablighi Jamaat is engaged in the promotion of Islam and has not been implicated in any incitement to violence.



In early December, the North Caucasus District Military Court sentenced Makhachkala resident Girei Aminov to five years of imprisonment in a minimum security penal colony under Article 205.5 Part 2 of the Criminal Code for participating in the activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir religious and political party, recognized as terrorist in Russia. Aminov was found guilty of joining Hizb ut-Tahrir, participation in the sessions to study its activities and literature, handing out leaflets and participating in pickets.

In the same few days, 12 people suspected of involvement in Hizb ut-Tahrir were detained and later arrested under Part 1 or Part 2 of Article 205.5 (organizing activities of a terrorist organization and participating in activities of such an organization). Searches were conducted in their places of residence in Moscow and the Moscow Region; the police reportedly confiscated religious literature and materials of extremist nature. The investigation believes that the defendants were engaged in propaganda sessions to involve citizens in the activities of the party.

We would like to remind that we regard prosecution of Hizb ut-Tahrir followers under terrorism charges solely on the basis of their party involvement (meetings, reading literature, etc.) as inappropriate.


Administrative Prosecution

It was reported In December, that nationalist social activist Nikolai Nagaitsev spent four days under arrest in Kemerovo under Article 20.29 of the Administrative Code (mass distribution of extremist materials) in mid-November. He was penalized for his VKontakte post - a screenshot containing information about the fact of blocking of “Russia for the Russians” online community. The prosecution submitted expert opinions from a professional political scientist and a professional philologist, who have come to the conclusion that the phrase “Russia for the Russians” was identical to a slogan entered in the Federal List of Extremist Materials with a hard sign at the end (p. 866). We believe that information about blocking of a community, whose name is similar to a banned slogan, does not constitute illegal incitement, and its dissemination should not be restricted. Nagaitsev served the term of his arrest and filed an appeal with the Kemerovo Regional Court.

It was reported in December that four followers of Jehovah's Witnesses were fined a thousand rubles each for the distribution of prohibited materials of their organization in the Urupsky District of the western border of Karachay-Cherkessia in October-November 2016. Police reports on Nadezhda Geraskova and Svetlana Kordiyaki were mentioned in our earlier report; Svetlana Isayeva and Alyona Kurganova were fined as well.

It became known in early December that the court had fined the local Jehovah's Witnesses organization of in Saransk (the Republic of Mordovia) 150 thousand rubles for possession of extremist materials with intent to distribute. Believers insisted that that the banned materials had been planted. The Saransk Jehovah's Witnesses community have already been fined earlier this year, and, subsequently, received a prosecutor's warning about the impermissibility of extremist activity.

In the second half of the month, the Leninsky District Court of Voronezh suspended the activities of the local Jehovah's Witnesses organization for 45 days. The community was found guilty of distributing leaflets deemed extremist, which were found by the security forces during a prayer meeting at a local sports center in October. The believers said that the literature in question had been planted by those conducting the raid. Jehovah's Witnesses followers in Voronezh were previously fined twice under Article 20.29.

It became known in mid-December that the Furmanov City Court fined a local resident two thousand rubles under Article 20.29 of the Administrative Code. The resident was prosecuted in connection with posting on his brother’s VKontakte page a video, recognized as extremist by the decision of the Novouralsk City Court of the Sverdlovsk Region on November 18, 2015. This ruling pertains to the following videos: “READ! Abu Yusuf. Appeal to the Russians and the Ukrainians,” and “I'm a Catholic and I'm Going to Hell.” It is not clear which video triggered the case against the Ivanovo Region resident. We believe that both videos were inappropriately recognized as extremist, and, therefore, prosecution for their distribution is inappropriate as well.



In early December, the Surgut City Court of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous District has sentenced a local activist Denis Hanzhin to three days of arrest under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code (public display of Nazi paraphernalia). Hanzhin – the leader of the Russian Spirit (Russky Dukh) community organization, who espouses Stalinist beliefs – and

his associates attended an event dedicated to the memory of victims of political repressions on the waterfront in Surgut on October 30. The activists carried the portraits of Yezhov, Yagoda and other senior officials executed under Stalin's orders, each captioned “A victim of Stalin's repressions.” Hanzhin himself was holding a portrait of General Andrey Vlasov executed in 1946 for collaboration with the Nazis. The court ruled that the image contained Nazi paraphernalia, probably referring to the Russian Liberation Army (ROA) badge on the General’s cap, since Vlasov's uniform is known to contain no other symbols or insignia. We believe that bringing Hanzhin to responsibility under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code is inappropriate – the activist did not promote Nazi ideology or expressed support for its sympathizers; he used the image of Vlasov as visual means of polemics with the participants of the action of memory of victims of repression. However, the Russian law does not take into account the context, in which banned symbols are displayed.

At the end of December, a Magistrate Court in Perm examined a case under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code against local resident Maxim Simonov, age 20. The Court concluded that it was not authorized to hear the case under this article, and transferred it to the Kirovsky District Court. Simonov was charged for two publications on his VKontakte page. In the spring of 2015 he shared on his page an entry from the “Uyutnenkoe Lurkomorye ” group, a text accompanied by an illustration, depicting a popular image – the word “fascism” modified into “rushism,” a double-headed eagle and the emblem with ears of wheat and the swastika in its center. In addition, Simonov published on his page a cover image from a book he found on the book fair during his visit to Kiev in the summer of 2015. The cover of the book depicts the swastika, the hammer and sickle and the modern Russian State emblem. We object to the prosecution under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code targeting opponents of military action in Ukraine, who use Nazi symbols as a polemical technique to accuse the Russian government of adopting totalitarian policies. It is obvious that such demonstrations of Nazi symbols have nothing to do with propaganda of Nazism.


In late December, the Magistrate Court of Judicial District No. 3 of the Sovetsky District in Oryol dismissed the case opened under Article 5.26 Part 2 of the Administrative Code (deliberate public desecration of religious or theological literature, objects of religious veneration, signs or emblems ideological symbols and paraphernalia or inflicting any damage or destruction) against retiree Andrey Nevrov. The Court found that Nevrov’s actions do not constitute an administrative offense, as they do not fall under the definition of desecration. Nevrov was detained when carrying out an action against the Oryol governor Vadim Potomsky in early December; he was standing on Lenin Square in Oryol holding a mock coffin with a cross on its lid and the inscription “Potomsky’s Mind, Honor and Conscience”. Earlier, Nevrov had been repeatedly detained and charged with disorderly conduct for actions expressing criticism of the local authorities, but the courts had dropped administrative proceedings in each case. We agree with the court decision – prosecution of Nevrov under Article 5.26 of the Administrative Code was inappropriate. His action was purely political, rather than religious, and, in any case, depiction of a cross on a coffin can’t be considered an insult to the religious symbol, since a cross is a traditional element of coffin design.


Other State Actions

It was reported in early December that the Federal Agency for the Affairs of Nationalities (FADN) in collaboration with the Ministry of Internal Affairs, is preparing a new system of questionnaires for students of secondary schools and universities. The questionnaires are intended to identify supporters of extremism and those prone to adopting extremist ideas. The agencies intend to test the project in Moscow, once it is approved by the city government. The survey is supposed to take place when prospective students submit their applications or in the first year. We believe that the idea of a questionnaire is legitimate, since it does not conflict with any legislation. However, there is no clarity regarding the entities that would have access to the results of such a project – would they include heads of educational institutions, Centers to Combat Extremism, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB, or any another agencies – and how will this data be used. We fear that the police might confuse respondents’ critical thinking with their affinity to extremist ideology. In the course of implementing this initiative, it would also be necessary to eliminate discrimination against applicants and students in an educational institution based on their questionnaire results and to ensure truly voluntary participation.