We publish an interview with Tyumen anarchist party "Autonomous Action" Andrey Kutuzov recently gave a local internet portal. Recall that the FSB has accused Andrew of "public calls to extremist activities" (Article 280 of the Criminal Code) on the basis of fraudulent flyers. Recently, prosecutors referred the case to court. In an interview with a detailed account of the situation, sets out background events and are diagnosed with the Russian "extremist" legislation.
Recall that the prosecution of activists began after the rally, held on October 30 last year in Tyumen.The rally was held in the All-Russian day of united action against the so-called center, "E" (divisions of the Department of Internal Affairs to combat extremism in Russia). Now Regional Directorate of the FSB Directorate in Tyumen region accuses Andrew Kutuzov that at this meeting, he distributed leaflets containing appeals for extremist activity. October 12 this year, Kutuzov was transferred to the status of the accused, and about a week ago, the case was transferred to the court.
- About a year ago, you were already figurant criminal case: a suspect in the case of applying the anti-war graffiti Tyumen military offices, however, to charge or trial is not reached because the investigation has not found evidence of your guilt.What evidence is presented to it this time?
- Yes, I and two other men then took the suspects, but it really fell apart, as a consequence could not prove anything.But after it was stopped prosecuting us, criminal proceedings were initiated against the staff of the Centre to combat extremism, as in the investigation of this case, they managed to beat the witness.
As for the case, then all the evidence I can not enumerate, because they represents six imposing volumes. But the main, it relies on the result - this is the testimony of "witnesses". The Federal Security Service, a leading my case, somehow miraculously "found" them six months after most rally October 30, 2009, on which I had given them "extremist leaflet.Perhaps needless to say that all the other people present at the meeting: the organizers, participants, journalists and even police officers who were guarding the rally - a chorus of caution that no leaflets calling for violent action, they're not seen.
- But the accusation is based not only on witness testimony.As proof of your guilt and give linguistic examination of the text leaflets.
- Yes, in fact, besides the testimony present examination. Firstly, the reason for instituting proceedings formally began linguistic expertise, which recognized the text of the most extremist leaflets. This examination took place in Yekaterinburg. One made Ural Center forensic specialists and mustache Arkharov, the second was performed again in Yekaterinburg, but the employee of the Sverdlovsk regional FSB some Mochalova.
In addition, even after I had been searched and I became aware of the existence of this criminal case - six months it was conducted without my knowledge - I and my lawyer asked avtorovedcheskoy examination, because from the outset we were clear that the leaflet faked.This means that it is a compilation of my texts are available online, but with the additions that made the other author, and are very clear conclusions of the leaflet on Article 280 of the Criminal Code ("Public calls for extremist activities").In response to our request a consequence of this leaflet sent to avtorovedcheskuyu expertise - would never guess where! - At the same control of the FSB Directorate in Sverdlovsk region, the same lady Mochalova. We decided to play it safe and send texts for examination in the Nizhny Novgorod State University and other independent experts.
The result can be predicted: Mochalova concluded that if the alleged leaflet and in my texts, there are several overlapping text fragments, so the author certainly one of them.Actually, I'd much that could be said about the consistency of its linguistic expertise - I PhD, that is, something in that sense - but perhaps it will not be very objective. So I'll rely on data from independent experts. They concluded that the text "extremist leaflets actually present foreign fragments that do not coincide with my texts on the level of literacy, communicative orientation and style.
If we speak human language, then here are these foreign fragments in the text of flyers really very different, because they, first, not very literate, and secondly, they are written quite differently. Our leaflet, which we really were distributed at the rally is sustained in a calm spirit: it contains the substance of the problem and suggests ways to solve it, and these methods are expressed in the form of a completely legitimate claims to the state authorities, for example: 114 to cancel federal law "On Countering Extremist activity ", to disband the Centers to combat extremism in the Interior Ministry and so on.
Well, in the fragments of foreign vocabulary is very expressive, a lot of swear words, like "morons" or "crooks". Moreover, these fragments were addressed not to the authorities, not the state, but to some abstract to readers of this leaflet, which calls to beat box in the Center "E", to paint the walls, "to destroy the elements" and so on.These phrases just might, and pull on the crime under article 280, since it involves public appeals for extremist activity.
Thus, in the case now, there are several conflicting linguistic examination: the examination of Mrs. Mochalova from Yekaterinburg, having no degree at all, and the expertise of a team of candidates and doctors who have come to opposite conclusions.
Me, honestly, humanly sorry investigators and detectives, who were and are my business. They are all well aware that it was fabricated, as they themselves participated in the fabrication. They see that I support all sorts of people: professors, travelers, hitchhikers, musicians, linuksoidov, civic activists, students, managers, journalists and so on. They themselves - just boring ordinary people who sit in their offices and carry out the plan, are afraid of the authorities and all that.I really feel sorry for them.
- It is noteworthy that the meeting at which you, according to investigators, gave "extremist" a leaflet was about the issue of anti-extremist legislation. As one of the organizers, you spoke of the need to repeal the federal law 114 and disband the Centers for countering extremism. Have you changed since then is your position?
- No, in general, I continue to believe that the existing law on extremism is now worthless.He, unfortunately, provides great room for abuse, in addition, it is highly illogical. Even by itself the concept of "extremism" is not well defined in the Act. From a purely worldly point of view, it seems clear that the "extremism" - this is some extreme ideology. But again, anyone clear that the "extreme" - a relative term. That is what was once thought extremism, for us now is commonplace.There is a good example: a hundred years ago in many "civilized" countries extremism was the requirement to provide voting rights to women, now extremism will look appeals to deprive women of these rights. Accordingly, here the law is the area that is unlikely in general, should be governed by the state: the territory of the personal views and opinions of each individual.
When the law "On Countering Extremist Activities", we assumed it was assumed that using it will be possible to deal with the radical nationalist and fascist ideology, the proliferation of ethnic strife.That is, had good intentions - to reduce the number of murders and other crimes motivated by racial hatred. But here's the kind of problem arises: if the law allows that a person can be punished, jailed only because he had nationalistic views - not because he killed someone, or there is a synagogue with swastikas painted, but simply for the fact that he thinks it is consequently nothing to prevent harass another person for what he has, for example, communist views, or liberal or anarchist or some other.But who will determine, for any persuasion to prosecute and for what - not? The law is very vague, so, in fact, determine it will be operative from the Center "E". It is clear that this operative - not an expert on sociology, politics, philosophy and so on.But he needs to take statements from him off the plan. That factory makes, in my case. So I think it is dangerous to give government agencies the right to decide what worldview "good" and which - "bad."
By the way, I'm not alone in this assessment of our "extremism" laws. The Human Rights Committee to the United Nations has twice - in 2007 and in 2009 - recommended Russia to amend the law "On combating extremist activity" in particular - to clarify the concept of extremism.Especially emphasized that in Russia the law is often used merely to prosecute those who criticize the government. But our government, unfortunately, has not yet listened to the opinion of the UN.
- If you refer to the practice of adjudication under article 280 of the Criminal Code, it is seen that the spread of the degree of punishment is very great: from fine to imprisonment. A verdict from the time of entry into force of this article was submitted only once.What punishment requires prosecutors to you? What do you expect from the court?
Firstly, we have the courts actually very rarely acquitted, not only to 280 article. Gives hope that still endure. Difficult to talk about what to expect. The prosecutor's office will require a specific punishment in the judicial investigation. And, of course, we will seek full justification. No half-measures do not satisfy me. I can admit that the judge will make a guilty verdict. Naturally, in this case it will be appealed to a higher court.I hope that the judge will work objectively, since, given the circumstances of the case, eventually one of the superior courts must cancel a conviction, even though it will be the European Court of Human Rights.
- Is there any criminal prosecution of influence on your teaching career?
- I'm still doing the teaching, science, recently spoke at the conference "Ecology of language at the crossroads of the sciences."That is, to honor the University of retaliation is not forthcoming, nor is it clear: you have the presumption of innocence, before the verdict everyone is presumed innocent. Naturally, that calm me this prosecution is not added, it takes up my time that I could spend on something useful, and the money I (and friends who helped me) spend on a lawyer. Therefore, although not fatal, but all this absurd thing really hurt my work.
- When to expect the first court session?
- The matter referred to the Magistrate's Court Central District.Once there they will decide on the date of the first (preliminary) meeting, I was notified by mail. Court hearings have legally open, so that readers of this interview may come and go independently assess the position of the defense and prosecution. I think it will be interesting.
Add new comment