Misuse of Anti-Extremism in September 2019

The following is our review of the primary and most representative events in misuse of Russia's anti-extremist legislation in September 2019.

Lawmaking

In September, the State Duma adopted in first reading a bill proposed by deputies from United Russia to introduce stricter liability for violations of legislation on information. According to the draft bill, Article 13.11 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (violating the legislation of the Russian Federation for collecting, keeping, using or disseminating personal data) should be supplemented by a norm on liability for refusal to store personal data of Russians on the Russian territory. In addition, the bill proposes to impose large fines for repeated violations of the information law covered under Articles 13.31, 13.35, 13.36, 13.37, 13.39, and 13.40 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, which also include anti-extremist restrictions. On the eve of the first reading of the bill, the State Building Committee proposed conducting an additional examination of the suggested fines for proportionality with the degree of public danger of the offenses, since even Parts 6 and 7 of Article 13.15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (production of media with public calls for terrorism; disclosure of state secrets in the media) impose lower fines than the ones proposed for other articles by the authors of the new bill.

Prosecutions for Incitement to Hatred and Oppositional Statements

It was reported in early September that the charge against video blogger Yegor Zhukov, a political science student from the Higher School of Economics, was reclassified from Article 212 of the Criminal Code (mass riots), under which he was charged in connection with the events in Moscow on July 27, 2019, to Article 280 Part 2 of the Criminal Code (public calls for extremist activity on the Internet); he was transferred from jail to house arrest. According to law enforcement agencies, four videos from the Zhukov’s channel contain “calls for extremist activities motivated by political hatred and hostility, including calls for forcibly changing the constitutional order, riots and obstructing the lawful activities of law enforcement officials.” In his videos Zhukov indeed calls for the opposition to engage in a more active and better planned struggle against the state system that has developed in Russia, but advocates exclusively non-violent methods of resistance. The methods of political struggle indicated by Zhukov, in our opinion, do not fall within the definition of extremist activity under the relevant law. Therefore, we regard the prosecution against the blogger under Article 280 of the Criminal Code as inappropriate.

In Pskov, journalist Svetlana Prokopieva was charged under Article 205.2 Part 2 of the Criminal Code (public justification of terrorism in the media) and put under travel restrictions. The prosecution has been based on Prokopieva’s radio show released in the fall of 2018 and dedicated to the causes of the explosion at the FSB office lobby in Arkhangelsk. Analyzing this incident, Prokopieva argued that the actions of a young man, who had committed the explosion, stemmed from the repressive policies of the state, and that young people growing up in the atmosphere of state-sanctioned brutality were at risk of responding to the state in the same manner. She soon became a suspect in the case on the justification of terrorism. In our opinion, the prosecution of the journalist is inappropriate since her show contained no statements to indicate that the ideology or practice of terrorism was correct and deserved to be imitated and never claimed it to be attractive or appropriate.

In early September, we found out that the Laishevsky District Court of Tatarstan fined I. Sirazetdinov 10 thousand rubles in August under Article 20.3.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (incitement to hatred or enmity, as well as the humiliation of human dignity). The charges were based on the fact of publication on a VKontakte public page of the video “Foreign Fascist Dictatorship in the Country,” which consisted of a recorded meeting of the Academy for Geopolitical Problems chaired by the head of this organization, Leonid Ivashov. Ivashov’s speech, recorded on the video, was generally devoted to criticism of the political regime; only once did he resort to his habitual nationalist rhetoric and expressed his suspicions of the Jews and the Han Chinese and their desire for world domination; his statements, however, were far removed not only from inciting hatred, but also from humiliating dignity. They can be classified as a case of hate speech, which, in our opinion, does not merit prosecution. We also reiterate our belief that authors rather than distributors of inflammatory statements should face primary responsibility for them.

In late September, the Magassky District Court of Ingushetia overturned the sentence for inciting hatred and enmity imposed under Article 282 Part 1 of the Criminal Code on Ingush activist Sarazhdin Sultygov, a co-chair of the Mehk-Khel movement, and terminated the proceedings in his case due to the lack of corpus delicti. This decision was made due to the partial decriminalization of Article 282. In June 2018, the Nalchik City Court of Kabardino-Balkaria sentenced Sultygov to a fine of 150 thousand rubles for making “derogatory and insulting remarks” against Ossetians at the Nalchik rally of March 8, 2016 in connection with the conflict around the Prigorodny district. In our opinion, the criminal prosecution against Sultygov lacked sufficient grounds, since his statements could be interpreted as hate speech, but not as a dangerous incitement to hatred.

In the Ivanovo region, the court fined S. Morkovkin 1,500 rubles under Article 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (mass distribution of extremist materials) for posting on his VKontakte page a video based on a song by the band Vietnam Rechitatiff, which we view as inappropriately banned, since it is satirical and not aimed at propaganda of Nazi ideology.

In Altai Krai, activist Oleg Grigoryev from Barnaul was fined one thousand rubles for reposting the banned 2011 video “Let's Remind Crooks and Thieves about Their Manifesto-2002” created by supporters of Alexei Navalny. The video “Let's Remind Crooks and Thieves about Their Manifesto-2002,” for which oppositional activists are often persecuted, merely lists a number of unfulfilled campaign promises from the 2002 United Russia party manifesto and calls to vote for any party other than United Russia. We regard the ban on this video as unjustified, and prosecution for its distribution as inappropriate.

In September, we learned about the unjustified prosecution against at least two people under Article 20.3 Part 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (public display of Nazi or extremist symbols). We view prosecution for the display of symbols as inappropriate when such display is not aimed at promoting the corresponding ideology. Back in August, Alexander Kruglov, the chairman of the organizing committee of the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (VKP(b)), was fined one thousand rubles in Samara after three images depicting Vladimir Putin and Nazi symbols had been found on his VKontakte page. Obviously, Kruglov did not pursue the aim of advocating Nazi ideology by posting these images; on the contrary, he used the swastika as a means of political criticism. In the Republic of Tatarstan, the court fined M. Voloshko one thousand rubles for publishing on VKontakte the video “Rap Battle / Putin v. Hitler,” which briefly shows a depiction of the swastika and is included on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. The video is satirical in nature and is not aimed at promoting Nazism.

At least two people who uttered rude statement about the president were punished in September under Article 20.1 Part 3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses for “insulting the authorities.” On at least two other occasions, such administrative cases were terminated.

Prosecutions against Religious Organizations and Believers

In September, two sentences were issued against followers of Jehovah's Witnesses.

The Zheleznodoroznhy District Court of Khabarovsk found Valery Moskalenko guilty of participating in an extremist organization (Article 282.2 part 2 of the Criminal Code) and sentenced him to two years and two months of community service with an additional six-month sentence of restriction of freedom.

In Saratov, the Leninsky District Court found six Jehovah's Witnesses guilty under Article 282.2 Part 1 of the Criminal Code (organizing the activities of an extremist organization) and sentenced Konstantin Bazhenov and Alexei Budenchuk to three and a half years of imprisonment, Felix Makhammadiev to three years of imprisonment, and Roman Gridasov, Gennady German and Alexei Miretsky to two years of imprisonment. All six were also given an additional punishment in the form of a ban on holding leadership positions in community organizations for a period of five years and restriction of freedom for one year. The convicted offenders intend to appeal the verdict.

In addition, a criminal case was initiated in Karelia under Article 282.2 Part 1 of the Criminal Code against another follower of the Jehovah's Witnesses teachings. The investigation imposed travel restrictions on the suspect in this case, Petrozavodsk resident Mikhail Gordeev.

We would like to remind that, in April 2017, the Supreme Court of Russia recognized the Jehovah's Witnesses Administrative Center in Russia and 395 local religious organizations of Jehovah's Witnesses as extremist. We believe that this decision, which led to the mass prosecution of believers under Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code, had no legal basis, and regard it as a manifestation of religious discrimination.

In Tatarstan, three local residents charged with continuing the activities of the Islamic movement Tablighi Jamaat, recognized in Russia as extremist, received their verdicts. A Tatarstan resident, whom the court recognized as the leader of the cell, was sentenced to six years in a minimal security colony under Article 282.2 Part 1 of the Criminal Code and two of his associates – to two years in a penal colony under Article 282.2 Part 2. According to the investigation, whose version was upheld by the court, the offenders had conducted preaching and recruitment work on behalf of Tablighi Jamaat in the Bavlinsky, Aznakaevsky and Rybno-Slobodsky districts of Tatarstan. Presumably, the offenders in question are Tagir Salimov, Marat Nazmiev and Fanis Usmanov. Tablighi Jamaat is a religious movement banned in Russia in 2009 without due justification, in our opinion; it promotes fundamentalist Islam but has never been implicated in any calls for violence. We view prosecution against its supporters as inappropriate.

We found out in September that Rasima Safina, a self-employed businesswoman, was fined two thousand rubles in May in the Sverdlovsk Region under Article 20.29 (mass distribution of extremist materials). Two copies of the books Mukhammad velichaishy iz vsekh [Muhammad the Greatest of All] and Zhenschina v Islame i v iudeisko-khristianskom mire [Women in Islam Versus Women in the Judeo-Christian Tradition] were found to be on sale at her store. Safina pleaded guilty, saying that the literature was stocked by her husband, who had already died. Safina is a founder of local Muslim religious organizations. In our opinion, she was prosecuted inappropriately, because the books found in her store did not incite religious hatred and were banned for no reason.

A new criminal case was opened under Article 205.5 of the Criminal Code (organizing activities of a terrorist organization or participation in it) in Togliatti of the Samara Region. Four people have faced charges: Radik Khayruddinov, Elmar Mamedov, Alexei Botva and Rais Mavlyutov. All four have been accused of membership in the banned Islamic political party Hizb ut-Tahrir. Searches were conducted in their homes with the confiscation of literature; they were detained and later arrested. We would like to reiterate our opposition to charging Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters under anti-terrorism Criminal Code articles, since the organization does not practice violence, and the defendants face charges merely for their party activity – holding  meetings, studying and disseminating party literature, and so on.

Prosecutions for Anti-Religious Statements

On the last day of the month, the Magistrate Court of Unit No. 8 of Kirovsky District in Irkutsk ruled on the case of anarchist Dmitry Litvin, charged under Article 148 Part 1 of the Criminal Code. The court found Litvin guilty of insulting the feelings of believers and sentenced him to 100 hours of community service, but Litvin was released from punishment, as well as from the court fees, due to expiry of the limitation period for the case. The court found signs of insulting the feelings of believers in only one of the four anti-Christian memes that formed the basis of the charges against Litvin – an image of an indecent gesture with a church on the background. No “violation of established norms and rules” was found with respect to other images. Litvin stated his intent to appeal the court decision. We regarded Litvin’s prosecution as inappropriate, since the images he had posted contained no aggressive appeals, and their publication did not constitute a public danger; subsequently, the activist’s guilty verdict was unfounded as well. In general, we are convinced that the concept of “insulting the feelings of believers” added to Article 148 of the Criminal Code has no clear legal meaning and should be excluded from the legislation.