The following is our review of the primary and most representative events in the misuse of Russia’s anti-extremist legislation in January 2017.
Lawmaking
On January 11, 2017, the State Duma approved in the second reading a government bill to strengthen the responsibility of Internet providers for failure to fulfill their obligations to block webpages. The bill introduces a new Article 13.32 into the Administrative Code, under which officials are fined in the amount of three to five thousand rubles, individual entrepreneurs - 10 to 30 thousand, and legal entities - 50 to 100 thousand rubles for failure to fulfill their responsibilities to block and unblock sites.
On the same day, the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, Information Technology and Communications recommended approval in the first reading of the draft amendments to the federal law “On Mass Media,” introduced in the lower house of parliament in December 2015. The bill, among other things, provides for a ban on founding a media outlet for persons serving sentences or have an unremoved or outstanding prior conviction for crimes against the constitutional order and security of the state, as well as for grave or particularly grave crimes related to violation of legislation on the media and legislation on counteracting extremist activity. In addition, the amendments allow Roskomnadzor to deny permission to distribute a foreign printed periodical publication or revoke such a permission if the publication does not comply with the article of the law on the misuse of media and the anti-extremist legislation as a whole. Our reasons for opposing this bill are presented here.
In mid-January, the expert working group, which considers petitions of the Russian Non-Governmental Initiative amassing over 100,000 votes, rejected a proposal to abolish the Yarovaya Package of laws, but suggested incremental increases to the required storage duration of user-transmitted data and not obligating providers to store streaming video, IPTV, torrent and so on, and thus reducing the amount of stored data tenfold. The expert group also recommended the State Duma to consider changes to the current regulations in order to exclude possibility of an excessively broad interpretation of the concepts such as “missionary activity,” “extremist activity,” and “insulting religious feelings of believers,” and urged the Supreme Court to inform the lower courts on impermissibility of broad interpretations of these concepts.
In late January, Deputy Vitaly Milonov introduced in the State Duma a bill suggesting administrative penalties for public insults related to “belittling the significance of the events of particular historical importance for the formation and development of the Russian statehood and memorable dates of scientific and technological achievements,” as well as for insults against persons recognized for their exceptional service to the state. In addition, Milonov suggested stipulating a punishment in the Administrative Code for a public “insult to the memory of victims of political repression or acts of terrorism, as well as victims of accidents, natural disasters, armed and ethnic conflicts.” The Deputy proposes fines or compulsory labor as fitting punishments for these offences. In our view, Milonov’s draft bill constitutes yet another assault on freedom of speech, intended to keep public discussion in the limits of the top-down ideological framework, and to move issues, relating to the sphere of ethics and morality, to the sphere of legal regulation. However, as we hope, the chance of this bill getting passed is small.
In January, Rafis Kashapov, serving a sentence under an aggregation of Criminal Code articles, including Article 280.1 (public calls for actions aimed at violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation), sent an appeal to the Constitutional Court challenging the constitutionality the very Article 280. Its composition, especially in view of the Supreme Court clarification of November 4, 2016, criminalizes expressions that contain no incitement to unlawful actions, thus failing to conform to restrictions on freedom of speech specified in the Constitution.
Criminal prosecution
The Nakhimovsky District Court of Sevastopol sentenced a local resident Vitaly Slavikovsky to two years imprisonment under Article 282 Part 1 of the Criminal Code (incitement of ethnic hatred) in January. He was found guilty of incitement to hatred against members of particular ethnic groups and against fans of the FC Spartak Moscow by posting materials on VKontakte. We view the charge as partially inappropriate – the Spartak fans are not a vulnerable group in need of protection under anti-extremist legislation.
The Moscow City Court changed the sentence of the Zelenogradsky District Court with respect to Yevgeny Kort convicted under Article 282 Part 1, replacing his prison term with a fine of 200 thousand rubles. Kort was sentenced to such a severe punishment merely for sharing on VKontakte a racist collage from the account of well-known ultra-right activist Maxim “Tesak” Martsinkevich. In our opinion, while Kort evidently sympathized with neo-Nazi ideology, sharing of one image was not a sufficient reason for bringing him to criminal responsibility.
A criminal investigation against Danis Safargali, the leader of Altyn Urda (the Golden Horde) Tatar Patriotic Front, (Article 282 Part 1) was completed in January. He posted on his personal VKontakte page 15 posts, which, according to the investigation, incited hatred on ethnic and religious grounds as well as hatred against a particular social group. We believe that the prosecution of Safargali is at least partially inappropriate. In particular, we oppose prosecution under Article 282 for publications that criticize or insult the president of Russia, the authorities or the media, since they can’t be considered vulnerable groups in need of protection in the form of anti-extremist legislation. Legitimacy of the prosecution for the video “Rashist pseudo-spirituality of the ROC” is doubtful as well - it is directed against the Russian Orthodox Church as an organization, and contains no calls for aggression.
The Vladimir Regional Prosecutor’s Office approved an indictment in the criminal case against Gorokhovets resident Michael Pokalchuk. He has been accused of inciting hatred against the social group “anti-fascists” (Article 282 Part 1) by posting a video on a social network. We believe that the anti-fascists do not constitute a vulnerable population group in need of protection under anti-extremist legislation.
The investigation into the case of Vladimir Hagdaev, accused under Article 280.1 Part 2 (public incitement on the Internet to violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation's) and Article 228 Part 2 of the Criminal Code (illegal purchase and possession of drugs without intent to sell in large quantities), was completed in Buryatia in January. Among other charges, he is accused of posting on VKontakte an image with a quote from an interview with journalist Alexandra Garmazhapova (in which she criticized Russian nationalists and referred to secession of Buryatia from Russia as a hypothetical scenario), as well as two comments about being ready for the armed assimilation of the Russian neighbor and calling for “a big geopolitical shift”. We believe that prosecution of Hagdaev for posting the image was inappropriate, since it contained no separatist appeals. With regard to the comments, the prosecution of their publication can’t be regarded as inappropriate, but it should be noted that their audience was very small, and accordingly, they presented no significant public danger.
In Kromy, the Oryol Region, a new criminal case under Article 282 Part 1 was initiated against poet Alexander Byvshev. The prosecution was based on the fact that the poet published on VKontakte his poem On the Independence of Ukraine. In our view, the poem contains statements, which may be interpreted as humiliating for the Russians, but we believe that humiliation should be excluded from the criminal code as an act of minor gravity.
Jehovah's Witnesses continue defending themselves from inappropriate and discriminatory allegations of extremism. In early January, The Sergiev Posad City Court proceeded to reopen the criminal case, initiated in 2013 under Article 282 of the Criminal Code (incitement of religious hatred), against Vyacheslav Stepanov and Andrey Sivak, the elders of the local religious organization. They have been accused of quoting banned Jehovah's Witnesses pamphlets during the meeting; the pamphlets included negative characterizations of other religions, including “traditional” Christianity and Christian clergy, and calls to join Jehovah's Witnesses. The Sergiev Posad City Court acquitted Stepanov and Sivak in March 2016, however, the Moscow Regional Court overturned that decision and sent the case for retrial.
At the same time, it was reported that criminal charges against six Jehovah's Witnesses in Taganrog, the Rostov Region, were dropped in December 2016 on the rehabilitative grounds. The believers, charged under Article 282.2, were accused of continuing the activity of “Taganrog” - the banned local Jehovah's Witnesses organization - by praying and reading the Bible together in 2011.
Two men were arrested In Kazan as part of the investigation in the case of a “Moscow cell” of the banned religious movement Tablighi Jamaat, initiated in December 2016 under Parts 1 and 2 of Article 282.2 (organizing an extremist organization or participating in it). We regard the ban against Tablighi Jamaat as inappropriate, because this movement’s mission is to promote Islam, and it was never known to issue any calls for violence.
In late January, the Russia's Supreme Court reduced by six months the prison sentence of Magomednabi Magomedov, the Imam of the Vostochnaya mosque in Khasavyurt, bringing it down to 4.5 years. Imam was convicted under Article 205.2 Part 1 (public justification of terrorism) and under Article 282 Part 1 (incitement of hatred or enmity) for delivering a sermon in February 2016, in which he urged the Salafis to seek peaceful means of protecting their rights.
Two persons involved in the Hizb ut-Tahrir case in Crimea - Enver Bekirov and Vadim Siruk – faced additional charges in January; they have been accused of attempting to overthrow the government (Article 30 and Article 278 of the Criminal Code.). Bekirov and Siruk, along with Emir-Usein Kuku, Muslum Aliev, Refat Alimov and Arsen Dzhepparov had been previously charged with organizing a terrorist organization and participating in it (Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 205.5).
Hizb ut-Tahrir followers in Russia have not yet been caught engaging in actual conspiratorial activities or preparing terrorist acts, and we view the practice of prosecution under such Criminal Code articles solely on the basis of their party activity (i.e. discussions or distributing literature) as inappropriate.
Administrative Prosecution and Other State Actions
In January, we learned about three cases of prosecution under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code for the public display of Nazi symbols, which we considered inappropriate; we question the assertion that the defendants were promoting Nazi ideology. Back in December 2016, the Lomonosovsky District Court of Arkhangelsk fined Denis Danilov, the head of the Civil Security Center a thousand rubles, and the Arkhangelsk Regional Court dismissed the appeal against this decision on January 19. “Sectologist” Danilov was penalized for posting on VKontakte the video “The Truth about Modern Paganism,” which showed Nazi symbols and stressed their relationship with the neo-pagan solar symbols.
In Tsivilsk (The Chuvash Republic), seven administrative reports under Article 20.3 of the Administrative Code were filed against Anton Kravchenko, a local activist of the Open Russia movement. The law enforcement had issues with the content of Kravchenko’s VKontakte page - Nazi symbols were found in the stills from the documentary Ordinary Fascism by Mikhail Romm and in humorous video “Hitler’s Address to Stalin.”
In Mednogorsk, the Orenburg Region, administrative proceedings were initiated against lawyer Yevgeniy Pleskachyov, whose page on Odnoklassniki social network was found to contain a photo of his friend, who had a swastika tattoo. We doubt that Pleskachyov posted his friend’s photo with the intention of Nazi propaganda; he could have simply “liked” photo, add the tattooed friend to his friend list, or be tagged on the image – Odnoklassniki displays all of these actions on a user’s page.
In late January, we learned about Muslims of Kusa, the Chelyabinsk Region, who had faced administrative responsibility. Five residents were fined under Article 20.29 of the Administrative Code (possession of extremist materials for the purpose of mass distribution) for possession of religious books at home. The found books included wrongfully banned The Fortress of a Muslim and Islam Today. The basis for allegations that Kusa residents possessed these materials for the purpose of mass distribution is also unclear.
The Dzerzhinsk City Court of the Nizhniy Novgorod Region fined the head of the local religious organization of Jehovah's Witnesses 4000 rubles under Article 20.29 of the Administrative Code. The charges were based on the fact of finding two leaflets, recognized as extremist, in the bathroom for the disabled during the inspection of the building used for worship. Believers claimed that the literature had been planted.
In mid-January, the Moscow City Court upheld the warning about the impermissibility of extremist activity, issued to the Administrative Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia by the Prosecutor General. The organization intends to appeal the decision of the Moscow City Court, and fears that the warning is only the first step towards the ban.
In January, it became known that the Kirovo-Chepetsk Town Prosecutor's Office was preparing materials for a claim seeking to eliminate the local Jehovah's Witnesses organization. This development is related to the fact that, in December of the preceding year, the Kirovo-Chepetsk District Court of the Kirov Region dismissed the appeal by the organization against the warning regarding impermissibility of extremist activity, imposed on it.
It was also reported in January, that, in late December 2016, the Vyborg District Court granted the petition of the evangelical Christian association Gideons International and recognized as illegal the actions of the Vyborg customs, which, in the summer of 2016, detained at the Finnish border a large shipment of the New Testament and the Psalms, suspecting that the books contained signs of extremism. The arrested print run has become unfit for use.
In January, the prosecutor's office reported that two Nizhny Novgorod cafes had been fined 20 thousand rubles each under Article 6.17 Part 2 of the Administrative Code for failure to install content filters. We oppose prosecution of administrators of cafes, Internet cafes, hotels and similar establishments for lack of content filtering, since they are intended not only for children (supervised by the parents), but also for adult users whose rights should not be limited.
