Misuse of Anti-Extremism in October 2023 / SOVA

Misuse of Anti-Extremism in October 2023

29.12.2023

The following is our review of the primary and most representative events in the misuse of Russia's anti-extremist legislation in October 2023.

Lawmaking

On October 6, draft amendments to the order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia “On service by local police commissioners in their administrative precincts and the organization of such activity” were submitted for public discussion. Among other initiatives, the amendments impose on local police officers the obligation to carry out individual preventive work with citizens who have committed administrative offenses under the following articles of the Code of Administrative Offenses (CAO): Article 20.3 (public display of Nazi symbols or symbols of a banned organization) and Article 20.3.3 (discrediting the use of the Russian armed forces or the exercise by government agencies of their powers abroad). Police officers will also work preventively with offenders brought to justice for infringing on the order during public and sports events. The explanatory note to the draft order indicates that the relevant norm here is Article 19.3 CAO (disobedience to a lawful order of a police officer). Until now, preventive measures targeted only offenders brought to justice under Article 20.2 CAO (the "rally article") or Article 20.31 CAO (the "soccer fan article.")

On October 17, a group of deputies and senators led by Artem Metelev and Andrei Klishas introduced a new bill on non-profit organizations (NPOs) to the State Duma. The amendments determine the procedure for exit or expulsion from the group of founders of NPOs and religious organizations. Among other provisions, the bill outlines the procedure for expelling a person from the founders of an NPO if their actions are determined by the court to exhibit signs of extremist activity. The bill also bans any legal entity included on the List of foreign and international non-governmental organizations whose activities have been recognized as undesirable in Russia from acting as a founder (participant, member) of a non-profit organization or a public association.

Activities of the European Court of Human Rights

In October it became known that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) communicated 25 complaints from Russian citizens fined under Article 20.3.3 CAO (discrediting the use of the Russian armed forces), as well as two complaints from journalist Michael Nacke and artist Sasha Skochilenko, who were charged with spreading “fakes about the army” (Article 207.3 of the Criminal Code (CC)). Later, information appeared that on September 29, the ECHR communicated 174 additional complaints, including 160 complaints fined for discrediting the armed forces and disseminating false information, five complaints from defendants in criminal cases related to “fakes about the army,” as well as complaints from Google, Twitter and Meta against the fines imposed for their failure to remove prohibited information.

Sanctions for Anti-Government Statements And Activities

Justifying Terrorism

In the second half of October, it was reported that the Central Military District Court was reviewing the materials of the case against Pavel Danilov, a resident of the settlement of Troitsky in the Sverdlovsk Region. The court suspended the trial because the defendant fled. Danilov was charged under Article 205.2 Part 2 (public justification of terrorism), Article 280 Part 2 (public calls for extremist activities), and paragraph “c” of Article 280.4 Part 2 CC (public calls for activities directed against state security). The criminal prosecution was based on his comments on YouTube. The case under Article 205.2 CC was initiated due to a humorous comment under the video “Crimean Bridge: Who Blew up Putin’s Main Project and How Russia Will Respond,” posted on Ilya Varlamov’s YouTube channel. Danilov wrote that, as a result of the explosion, the bridge “has fulfilled its tasks and moved to more advantageous positions.” Law enforcement officials interpreted Danilov’s statement as a public justification of terrorism. The charge under Article 280 CC is related to the comment that Danilov left under the video “Freedom of Russia Legion” in April 2022. In a comment under the video, a YouTube user asked what Russians should do if they do not agree with the political course of the authorities. In response, Danilov proposed “undermining the system from within.” The investigation interpreted this comment as a call for forcible regime change. From our point of view, the prosecution of Danilov under Article 205.2 CC is inappropriate. According to the note to Article 205.2 CC, public justification of terrorism is defined as “a public statement recognizing the ideology and practice of terrorism as correct, in need of support and imitation.” We found no such statements either in Danilov’s post or in the video he commented on. We also doubt the validity of the prosecution against Danilov under Article 280 CC, since his calls to “undermine the system” can be interpreted in a number of different ways, including as a call for peaceful political action. More on the problem of assessing the legality of prosecution under Article 280 CC in such situations can be found here. The charge under Article 280.4 CC is associated with Danilov’s comment calling for Russians, who had left the country, to join the Freedom of Russia Legion later recognized in Russia as a terrorist organization. Previously, Danilov had also been fined under Article 20.3.3 CAO.

Inciting Hatred towards the Authorities and Their Supporters

In October, we learned about four cases filed under Article 20.3.1 CAO (inciting hatred or enmity, as well as humiliation of human dignity) for critical statements about that did not involve calls for violence.

On April 17, the Kuybyshevsky District Court of Omsk fined local resident Sergei Suvorov 10 thousand rubles for his offensive comment against law enforcement officers and Vladimir Putin under a VKontakte post about an Omsk minor, who was facing administrative liability under Article 20.3.3 CAO.
On August 24, the Promyshlenny District Court of Vladikavkaz fined journalist Ruslan Totrov 20 thousand rubles for an Instagram post, in which the journalist criticized civil servants, police officers in particular, having read the news about a Moscow resident detained at the Vladikavkaz airport for reading a book in Ukrainian during her flight from the capital; she was charged with discrediting the Russian army. In his post, Totrov called the civil servants “model fascists.”
On October 20, the Anzhero-Sudzhensky City Court of the Kemerovo Region fined a retired trade union activist Oleg Tyryshkin 10 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.1 CAO. The activist insulted FSB officers in his posts in the “We are for Putin” VKontakte group. Earlier, Tyryshkin had been brought to justice under Article 20.3.1 CAO (see below) and fined under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO (public display of Nazi symbols) and Article 20.1 Part 3 CAO (“disrespect for authority”). In our opinion, all these sanctions were inappropriate.
On September 29, the Mezhdurechensk City Court of the Kemerovo Region fined Georgy Okunev 10 thousand rubles. He left comments on the topic of the “special military operation” in Ukraine on a VKontakte public page. Experts identified in Okunev’s statements the signs of humiliation of the dignity of security agencies.

In addition, in October we noted three cases filed under for petty hooliganism (disorderly conduct) for disrespectful statements about the authorities on the Internet.

On October 5, the Kerch City Court of Crimea fined Vladislav Kislyakov 60 thousand rubles for publishing certain information about Vladimir Putin on VKontakte in 2022. He was also fined 40 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO and spent 10 days under arrest under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO.
On October 11, the Pervomaisky District Court of Crimea received reports filed under the same three articles against Asida Bodzhek, a resident of the village of Otkrytoye. The Crimean woman reported that she had posted information discrediting the armed forces and the President of Russia on social networks. The court considered her case under Article 20.1 Part 3 CAO in early November; Bodzhek faced sanctions on all three counts.
On October 25, 2023, the Yalta District Court found Natalya Golokolosova guilty under Article 20.1 Part 3 CAO, and she faced unspecified sanctions. Apparently, she was charged for memes about Vladimir Putin and Sergei Shoigu posted on her VKontakte account. They were shared on the “Crimean SMERSH” Telegram channel. Golokolosova was forcibly detained by special forces, and then the channel posted the video of her public apology as well as the video of Bodzhek’s apology.

On October 12, the Pervomaisky District Court of Izhevsk fined Askar Mukhametshin two thousand rubles under Article 20.29 CAO (mass distribution of extremist materials). The case was based on Boris Sevastyanov’s song “Take Me Away, Mom!” posted on Mukhametshin’s VKontakte page. This song was recognized as extremist in 2019, in our opinion, inappropriately. The song’s protagonist is a Russian soldier who died in Donbas. The song contains criticism of the Russian authorities and a call for Russia and the soldiers' mothers to bring the servicemen home, but no aggressive incitement. Accordingly, in this case, we consider the sanctions against Mukhametshin under Article 20.29 CAO inappropriate.

On October 13, it was reported that a criminal case had been opened in the Kemerovo Region under Article 282 Part 1 CC (incitement of hatred or enmity, as well as humiliation of human dignity) against Lenard Valeev from Prokopyevsk. The case was based on a comment left by Valeev on the “Na Dne” ["The Lower Depths"] VKontakte public page under a post about a criminal case opened in connection with the armed rebellion of the Wagner Group. Valeev wrote that “Prigozhin disturbed the Russian chicken coop, in which everyone sits on their allotted roost,” but nothing came out of it other than noise, since “in this semi-state made of plywood and cardboard” there are no citizens, “only fakes and the cowardly population, who can’t do a damn thing.” The experts who examined the comment concluded that “the post contains statements that incite hatred, enmity and humiliate the human dignity of citizens,” “residents of the Russian Federation.” In our opinion, Valeev’s comment gave no reason for prosecution, because its purpose was not to incite hatred or humiliate dignity on ethnic grounds but to express his political criticism of his opponents (and the statement’s author viewed the majority of his compatriots as such) reproaching them for their lack of an active civic position. Previously, Valeev had faced sanctions for his comment under a video in a certain newsgroup, which negatively assessed a social group of people “on the basis of being residents of Russia’s regions.” For this offense, the Rudnichny District Court of Prokopyevsk fined him 10 thousand rubles in May finding him guilty under Article 20.3.1 CAO. In our opinion, such a broadly defined social group is not vulnerable and does not need special protection from manifestations of hatred.

On October 9, the Khoroshevsky District Court of Moscow fined Dmitry Mutkov, an acting director of the local municipal engineering service, 10 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.1 CAO. During a work-related conversation in June, Mutkov said that he “prefers the way foreign citizens work, because they like to work, unlike Russians.” When his interlocutors objected that they had not noticed any greater love for work among foreigners, Mutkov replied that he had never encountered it among the “Russians.” In early September, nationalist public pages circulated a video of Mutkov’s words. The court ruled that Mutkov had been talking about the work ethics of ethnic Russians. We believe that he had in mind not specifically ethnic Russians but Russian citizens in general, who, in our opinion, should not be considered a vulnerable group in need of special protection. However, even if we interpret Mutkov’s statement as creating a negative image of ethnic Russians, it can only be classified as soft hate speech, which, in our opinion, does not form a sufficient reason for prosecution.

Discrediting the Use of the Armed Forces or Government Agencies

According to the Mediazona portal as of October 19, the total number of cases received by Russian courts under Article 20.3.3 from the moment of its introduction into the CAO has reached 8122. The number of defendants in criminal cases initiated under Article 280.3 CC, according to the OVD-Info project, exceeded 126 people in October. Our calculations indicate that courts issued verdicts on 51 of them by the end of October.

In October, we learned of seven sentences under Article 280.3 Part 1 CC for repeatedly discrediting the use of Russian armed forces.

On September 13, the Naberezhnye Chelny City Court of Tatarstan sentenced local resident Dmitry Slabkovsky to a fine of 100 thousand rubles. The criminal prosecution of Slabkovsky was based on three comments he posted between July and October 2022 in the group “Science and Facts | What happens if…?” on VKontakte. In particular, he criticized the special military operation in Ukraine and called the Russians “aggressors and occupiers.”
On September 20, the Simferopol District Court of Crimea sentenced Daniil Seryogin, a resident of Partizanskoye, to one and a half years in a settlement colony under Article 280.3 Part 1 CC and Article 228 Part 1 CC for illegal possession of marijuana. The criminal prosecution was initiated based on Seryogin’s posts on Facebook. He often spoke out in support of Ukraine and criticized Russia’s armed actions in Ukraine. In April, the Simferopol District Court fined Seryogin under Article 20.3.3 CAO for publicly criticizing the special military operation and shouting in public that NATO troops would soon enter Crimea.
On October 6, the Uglegorsk City Court of the Sakhalin Region issued a two-year suspended sentence to journalist Anna Bilega from the village of Lesogorskoye with a two-year probationary period and a two-year ban on administering Internet websites. Bilega was fined 30 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO in March 2022 for a message she posted in the “Problems of Uglegorsk” WhatsApp group. After that, “using a publicly available profile open to viewing by an indefinite number of people,” she posted other online comments “with statements of a defamatory nature.” On October 31, the same court issued another verdict against Bilega, under Article 280.3 Part 1 CC. She received a two-year suspended sentence for a video she had posted on Odnoklassniki and for a comment to it. The court decided that both sentences should take effect independently.
On October 11, the Golovinsky District Court of Moscow sentenced Oleg Orlov, a co-chairman of the board of the Memorial Human Rights Center, to a fine of 150 thousand rubles. The case was based on Orlov’s Facebook post, which contained the Russian text of his own article “They Wanted Fascism. They Got It,” previously published in French by Mediapart. On October 27, the Center reported that the prosecutor's office filed an appeal against the verdict demanding that the sentence be replaced with three years in a minimum-security penal colony. The prosecutors argued that Orlov was motivated by “political and ideological hatred of Russian statehood and the state authorities of the Russian Federation, which (hatred) he tried to convey to as many people as possible,” that the punishment imposed on Orlov was too lenient, and that Orlov was the chairman of the board of the liquidated Memorial Human Rights Center and now “continues his activities in a similar community to undermine the stability of civil society.” He also “continues to speak negatively against the government of Russia, undermining the foundations of the Constitutional system and the state security,” and so on.
On October 17, the Kotlassky District Court of the Arkhangelsk Region sentenced local municipal deputy Anatoly Arseev to a fine of 120 thousand rubles for comments he posted on VKontakte from July to September 2022. Earlier, in May 2022, the Kotlas City Court fined Arseev under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO for his comments that characterized the actions of the Russian armed forces abroad as criminal and violent, “associated with the destruction of cities, resulting in suffering and death of people.”
On October 19, the Kievsky District Court of Simferopol sentenced local resident Dmitry Kozlya to a year in a minimum-security penal colony. In May 2022, the Kievsky District Court of Simferopol fined Kozlya 45 thousand rubles for his Facebook comments, finding him guilty under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO.

In October, we learned about eight new cases initiated under Article 280.3 Part 1 CC.

Back in early September, the Liskinsky District Court of the Voronezh Region received the case of Ruslan Bolgov. The reason for the criminal prosecution was not reported, but earlier, in December 2022, the same court fined Bolgov 30 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO for posting a certain video on his VKontakte page with comments that expressed his negative attitude towards Russia’s armed actions in Ukraine; another reason was his post with statements that contained a “negative assessment of the actions of the Russian Armed Forces as criminal acts, following criminal orders, destruction of civilian infrastructure and murder of civilians.”

On October 5, it was reported that another criminal case had been opened against blogger Sergei Veselov from Shuya, apparently based on the video “Do not confuse Germans with Nazis, and Russians with Putinists.” On Veselov’s YouTube channel, a video with this title consists of two parts; in both, the author criticizes the Russian authorities in connection with the special military operation in Ukraine. This video also formed the basis for bringing charges against Veselov under the article on the rehabilitation of Nazism (see below). Previously, the blogger was involved in criminal cases on the repeated discrediting of the army, vandalism motivated by political hatred, and insulting a judge.
On October 10, it was reported that a case had been initiated against Vyacheslav Polkanov in Tomsk; the case already reached court by late October. According to investigators, in February 2023, the Tomsk resident posted statements discrediting the Russian army on his social network page. Last July, the Kirovsky District Court of Tomsk fined Polkanov 35 thousand rubles for his solitary anti-war picket held in July 2022.
On October 12, we found out that a criminal case had been opened against Sergei Bakanov, a resident of Ryazan, for three anti-war messages he posted on Twitter. Earlier, the Oktyabrsky District Court of Ryazan fined Bakanov 45 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO finding him guilty of publishing a post about the bombing of civilian targets in Ukraine.
On October 14, we learned about the case against Tomsk activist Yevgeny Abramovsky. Since he currently stays abroad, the court imposed no preventive measures. The case was based on the video “Lice. Frostbite. Death. How Russian Conscripts Live and Die?” by blogger Michael Nacke, which Abramovsky shared on his VKontakte page. Last September, the Sovetsky Court of Tomsk fined Abramovsky three times under Article 20.3.3 CAO – twice for 40 thousand rubles and once for 30 thousand rubles – for his solitary pickets calling on the president to withdraw troops from the territory of Ukraine.
On October 24, we were informed of a criminal case against Roman Altukhov, a resident of Yasnaya Polyana in the Tula Region. According to the preliminary information, the criminal prosecution was based on Altukhov’s monograph Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy’s ‘No to War!’ which talked about the writer’s anti-war views and discussed what Tolstoy might have said in the context of the special military operation in Ukraine. In addition, the author criticized the leadership of modern Russia and its political course. In June of last year, the Schyokinsky Interdistrict Court of the Tula Region fined Altukhov 30 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO for his anti-war posts on social networks.
On October 25, we received information about two criminal cases under Article 280.3 Part 1 CC against Alexei Podolsky from Saransk, presumably due to his comments on VKontakte. Podolsky has left the country. In June, the Proletarsky District Court of Saransk fined Podolsky 30 thousand rubles under Article 20.3.3 CAO for several anti-war comments under a post in the VKontakte group “Overheard in Saransk/Overseen.” The post contained a call to sign up as volunteers for the special military operation. Previously, a criminal case against Podolsky was initiated under Article 205.2 Part 2 CC (public justification of terrorism) based on his comment approving the explosion on the Crimean Bridge.
On October 31, the investigation into the criminal case of former firefighter Andrei Anikyev from Yeniseisk in connection with his three comments posted in local VKontakte communities in the fall of 2022 was reported as completed. In the first comment, the author stated that, in contrast to the Great Patriotic War, the special military operation was aggressive and imperialistic and compared Vladimir Putin's actions to Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union. In the second comment, Anikyev listed military leaders who, at various times, opposed armed conflicts and contrasted them with those who committed crimes against foreign civilians. In his third comment, he stated that the army was attacking civilian infrastructure on Putin's orders. In the spring of 2022, Anikyev was fined twice under Article 20.3.3 Part 1 CAO – for publishing a photograph of a woman with an anti-war poster and for sharing a video message from military pilot Gennady Shtern, a Hero of the Russian Federation, with a call to stop the “destruction of Ukrainian cities.”

“Fakes about the Army” Motivated by Hatred

In October, we found information about five court decisions in cases involving charges of (under clause “e” of Article 207.3 Part 2 CC).

Back on July 21, the Severomorsky Garrison Military Court in the Murmansk Region issued a verdict under paragraph “e” of Article 207.3 Part 2 CC against an unnamed serviceman; we have no information about the sanctions or reasons for the prosecution.
On October 4, the Basmanny District Court of Moscow sentenced former Channel One editor Marina Ovsyannikova in absentia to eight and a half years in a minimum-security penal colony with a four-year ban on administering Internet resources. The reason for the criminal prosecution was her solitary anti-war picket held in July 2022 near the Kremlin.
On October 17, the Konakovo City Court sentenced local activist Andrei Trofimov to ten years in a maximum-security colony under paragraph “e” of Article 207.3 Part 2 CC, as well as under Article 280 Part 2 CC (calls for extremist activity on the Internet) and Article 208 Part 2 CC with Article 30 Part 1 CC (preparations for participation in an illegal armed formation). We do not know the basis for the prosecution under Articles 207.3 and 280 CC. According to investigators, the case under Article 208 with the use of Article 30 CC was opened because Trofimov intended to join the Freedom of Russia Legion.
On October 18, the Kurgan City Court sentenced Alexei Shvarts, the ex-coordinator of the local Navalny headquarters, in absentia, to six years in a minimum-security penal colony with a three-year ban on administering Internet resources. The basis for the prosecution against the activist is unknown.
On October 20, the 2nd Western District Military Court sentenced Mikhail Zharikov, ex-employee of the press service of the Torpedo Nizhny Novgorod hockey club, to six years in a minimum-security penal colony with a four-year ban on administering Internet resources. Zharikov was found guilty under paragraph “e” of Article 207.3 Part 2 CC, as well as under paragraph “c” of Article 354.1 Part 2 CC (dissemination of knowingly false information about the activities of the USSR during the Second World War or about veterans of the Great Patriotic War, committed on the Internet, see more on this below) and Article 205.2 Part 2 CC. Zharikov faced sanctions for his publications on Instagram and VKontakte.

Vandalism Motivated by Hatred

In early October, it was reported that a magistrate of Court District No. 9 of the Voroshilovsky District of Rostov-on-Don dismissed the criminal case against local resident Mikhail Selitsky, charged under Article 214 Part 2 CC (vandalism committed by a group of persons motivated by political hatred). This decision was made due to the expiry of the limitation period for the offense. Selitsky was initially sentenced back in October 2022 to one and a half years of restriction of freedom and compulsory outpatient treatment. In December 2022, the Voroshilovsky District Court of Rostov-on-Don reduced Selitsky’s sentence to a year and five months of restriction of freedom. As the investigation argued and the court accepted at the time, Selitsky and several other people, including another Rostov resident Kirill Skripin, “made inscriptions that were political statements” on the walls of residential buildings in 2021 (the incriminating graffiti read “Putin Is a Thief”). Skripin’s case was dismissed in March 2023 due to the expiry of the limitation period. After this, on August 3, 2023, the Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction overturned the sentence imposed on Selitsky and sent the case for a re-trial in magistrate court.

Countering Organized Anti-Government Activities

On October 13, Alexei Navalny’s lawyers Igor Sergunin, Alexei Liptser, and Vadim Kobzev were detained and then arrested as defendants under Article 282.1 Part 2 CC. According to the investigation, “the lawyers, using their status to gain access to the correctional facility, ensured regular transfer of information between the leaders and participants of the extremist community and A.A. Navalny, who thereby continued to exercise the functions of the leader and manager of the extremist community.” It must be noted that an “extremist community” is a community created for the preparation or commission of extremist crimes. However, the goals attributed by the investigation to Navalny and his supporters, in our opinion, do not constitute such crimes. Therefore, we view the charges against the politician personally or his supporters under Article 282.1 CC as inappropriate (you can read more about our position on this case here). Charges against the lawyers who provided legal assistance to Navalny appear even less justified.

In late October, a criminal case was opened against Anton Ziederer, a programmer from an aircraft repair company in St. Petersburg. He was charged under Article 282.3 Part 1 CC for a donation he made to the Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) in August 2021.

Displaying Banned Symbols

Two cases under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO (public display of Nazi symbols or symbols of a banned organization) recorded by us in October were associated with .

It was reported in October that, on August 31, the Birobidzhan District Court of the Jewish Autonomous Region fined local resident Vladimir Kudryashov one thousand rubles under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO. The license plate frames of his car depicted a Russian flag in a modified color scheme, which the court recognized as a symbol of a terrorist organization (apparently the Freedom of Russia Legion). Kudryashov explained that he bought a car with these frames in Khabarovsk and paid no attention to the colors of the flags.
On October 5, the Novgorod District Court of the Novgorod Region fined Oksana Sergeeva, a municipal deputy from Yabloko, two thousand rubles. Two photographs from emigrant rallies containing a white-blue-white flag were published in 2022 on her friends-only VKontakte page.

In addition, on October 25, the Zelenogradsky District Court of Moscow placed Daniil Voitovich, a student of the Moscow Institute of Electronic Technology (MIET), under arrest for five days under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO (public display of symbols of a terrorist organization). The court decision stated that on October 24, at the entrance of the university, Voitovich presented a student ID that had a cover featuring the symbols of the armed formation “Kastus Kalinovsky Regiment.” According to the court, the regiment is a “branch (subdivision on the territory of the Republic of Belarus)” of the Freedom of Russia Legion. The court ruling never described the exact appearance of the cover of Voitovich’s student ID, but the media reported that it was a white-red-white flag. It must be noted that the Kastuś Kalinoŭski Regiment is not part of the Freedom of Russia Legion and is not prohibited in Russia as such; thus, the demonstration of its symbols is not prohibited. If a white-red-white flag was the only symbol depicted on the cover, then we must point out that it became a symbol of the Belarusian opposition long before the creation of the Kalinoŭski Regiment and is widely used without any connection to this armed formation. The court also fined Voitovich under Article 20.3.3 CAO for saying: “Citizens of the Russian Federation and the government of the Russian Federation are fascists, unlike the citizens of Ukraine” and uttering the slogan “Glory to Ukraine” in a university classroom.

On October 3, the Sovetsky District Court of Makhachkala fined local resident Tamerlan Zubairov one thousand rubles. He was found guilty under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO (public display of symbols of an extremist organization). On October 4, the Kayakent District Court of the Republic of Dagestan imposed the same fine on Kamil Kaplanov. Both men were fined for pit bull stickers found on their cars. The courts ruled that these stickers represented the symbols of the Krasnodar Nazi skinhead group Pit Bull, which was recognized as an extremist organization in 2010. Meanwhile, pit bull stickers became popular among car enthusiasts after the advent of racing computer video games created by the English company Pitbull Syndicate Ltd. and have no connection to the banned Pit Bull. Zubairov and Kaplanov, living in Dagestan, obviously did not know about the long-banned Krasnodar organization and, accordingly, could not have been promoting its activities. Moreover, the court's decision to ban this group does not describe its symbols at all. Thus, it is unclear on what basis law enforcement agencies and the court decided that the image of a pit bull should be considered a symbol of an extremist organization.

On October 11, the Leninsky District Court of Yekaterinburg arrested local human rights activist Alexei Sokolov for five days under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO for a button with the Facebook logo found on the footer of the “Human Rights Defenders of Ural” website. We have not previously encountered examples of Article 20.3 CAO used in connection with the Facebook logo, but citizens were punished under this article at least twice for using the Instagram logo. We believe that Sokolov took no part in the activities of the Meta corporation but used the Facebook logo and the corresponding social network exclusively as part of his own professional activities.

In October, we also noted three cases under Article 20.3 Part 1 CAO for displaying Nazi symbols that we classified as .

On October 10, the Novodvinsky District Court of the Arkhangelsk Region fined Andrei Bratyuk one thousand rubles. As follows from the court ruling, Bratyuk’s page on VKontakte contained a photograph of Russian president Vladimir Putin against the background of the Russian flag with a swastika on the flag’s red stripe. The picture also contained a caption with slogans: “For 10 More Years of Poverty! For Wars with Neighbors! For Annual Indefinite Mobilizations!” and so on.
On October 3, the Novgorod District Court of the Novgorod Region fined Valery Kochnev, a medical doctor and a candidate for Veliky Novgorod’s City Duma, two thousand rubles. A video with a swastika was found on Kochnev’s VKontakte page. The report was based on a video of the song Zombie by the Cranberries posted on Kochnev’s page two years ago. The politician said at the trial that he did not post this video on the social network – he assumed that his page had been hacked. The defense also insisted that the clip itself was anti-Nazi. Note that the original Cranberries video uses footage filmed in Northern Ireland and contains symbols of the Irish Republican Army and related organizations but no Nazi symbols. Possibly, the case was based on one of the amateur versions of the video.
On October 25, the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow fined photographer Marionela Kostash two thousand rubles for a meme with a swastika posted on her Telegram channel. The photo artist confirmed that she made such a post but emphasized that her intent was entirely humorous, and that she “is not a member of or advocates for any movements.” We are not familiar with the specific picture published by Kostash, but we have no reason to suspect her of promoting Nazism. On the contrary, she indicates on social networks that she is a feminist and a vegan, and her accounts and channels are dedicated to her personal life and artistic photography. Therefore, we believe that the photographer was fined inappropriately. It should also be mentioned that Kostash was fined in March 2022 for participating in an anti-war rally.

Protecting Historical Memory and Traditional Values

“Rehabilitating Nazism”

Law enforcement agencies continue the practice of charges under Parts 3 and 4 of Article 354.1 CC for “desecrating the symbols of Russia’s military glory” and “insulting the memory of the defenders of the Fatherland,” that is, in particular, for showing disrespect and . At least two such verdicts were issued in October.

On October 2, the Komi Supreme Court sentenced Syktyvkar resident Vasily Zadorozhny to corrective labor under Article 354.1 Part 3 CC for an offense committed in April. He approached the Eternal Glory Memorial while intoxicated and doused the flame of the Eternal Flame with lemonade, thus extinguishing it.
On October 12, the Stavropol Regional Court sentenced residents of Dagestan Islam Bekuev and Karim Daitumov under Article 354.1 Part 4 CC (desecration of symbols of Russia’s military glory, committed by a group of persons) to one and a half and two years in a settlement colony, respectively. In early May, they approached the Eternal Glory Monument on the Walk of Glory in the Neftekumsk town park. Bekuev put his foot on the pedestal of the Eternal Flame bowl, and Daitumov urinated on the flame. Their actions were noticed by a local resident, who reprimanded them and contacted the police; as a result, both were detained.

Two new cases in this category were recorded in October.

At the beginning of the month, a criminal case under Article 354.1 Part 3 CC was initiated against two residents of Volzhsky in Krasnoyarsky District of the Samara Region, Alexander Vragov and Kamil Abdykanov. According to investigators, in September, while drunk, they approached a T-80 tank installed as a monument, climbed onto it, began to dance, shouting pro-Ukrainian slogans, and then exposed their buttocks and defecated on the monument.
On October 11, in Oryol, a case under Article 354.1 Part 4 CC was opened against 22-year-old Stepan Sitnik and 21-year-old Alexander Kulakov. Allegedly, in April 2023, they covered with white paint the graffiti on the territory of the Metallurg Cultural Center in Oryol that depicted the letter “ Z “ in the St. George Ribbon colors and the slogan “We do not abandon our own.” Sitnik painted the graffiti over, while Kulakov recorded the process on video.

We would also like to mention the charges under paragraph “c” of Article 354.1 Part 2 CC (dissemination of knowingly false information about the activities of the USSR during the Second World War or about veterans of the Great Patriotic War, committed on the Internet) brought against the above-mentioned Nizhny Novgorod resident Mikhail Zharikov. The charges were based on statements found by the investigation in three publications he made. The first of them is his post on VKontakte linking to “About Freaks and People. The Crippled Truth about Victory” (Pro urodov i lyudey. Iskalechennaya pravda o pobede) – a documentary by Inna and Andrei Kurochkin published on YouTube. This film claims, among other things, that in 1945 Prague was liberated not on May 9 by the Red Army forces under the command of Marshal Ivan Konev, but a day earlier, by local Resistance forces and fighters of the collaborationist Russian Liberation Army (ROA), who turned their arms against the Nazis; the Red Army forces, having entered Prague, started with “killing not Nazis but Russians” (wounded ROA fighters) and organizing raids on Russian emigrants of the first wave. The second publication is a VKontakte post dated May 8, 2023, in which Zharikov, reiterating the idea from the film, stated that “Konev and his Red Army coterie” “liberated nothing,” and the Prague had been liberated by the Resistance movement and “soldiers of the Vlasov ROA.” The third publication on this topic is an Instagram broadcast of June 2, during which Zharikov said that, during the Great Patriotic War, Soviet leaders “threw meat” at the enemy and as a result “put into the ground,” “according to the most conservative estimates, 40 million” people. He then repeated that the local militias and the ROA were the true liberators of Prague, while Konev, in his opinion, should be considered a war criminal.

We view the prosecution of Zharikov under Article 354.1 CC as inappropriate. Although it is known that ROA units took part in the Prague Uprising, the assertion that they, rather than the Red Army, were the ones to completely liberate the city is controversial. Information about the death of 40 million Soviet citizens in the war appears in the press and in statements of individual researchers, but in general, the scholarly community considered this estimate unreliable, and, in any case, it does not take natural mortality into account. However, in our opinion, unusual interpretations, ignorance, misrepresentation, and even deliberate distortion of historical facts should not form grounds for criminal prosecution, unless they contain propaganda of hatred, violence or discrimination. We found no such propaganda in Zharikov’s own statements. However, the glorification of ROA fighters for participating in the liberation of Prague in the documentary he published may seem inappropriate, in the absence of any condemnation of their collaboration.

The investigation did not specify which information about particular war veterans it regarded as false. However, we believe that if the relatives of any veterans (for example, Marshal Konev) viewed the information disseminated by Zharikov as defamatory, they could file a civil claim for the protection of honor and dignity.

In early October, the case under Article 354.1 Part 4 CC (insulting the memory of defenders of the Fatherland or humiliating the honor and dignity of a veteran of the Great Patriotic War, committed publicly using the Internet) was brought against Sergei Veselov, the above-mentioned blogger from Shuya. The criminal case was based on the video “Do not confuse Germans with Nazis, and Russians with Putinists” posted on the blogger’s YouTube channel. The second part of this video mentions the actions of the Soviet military after the liberation of Poland and Germany during the Great Patriotic War. In particular, Veselov claims that Soviet soldiers were engaged in looting and raping female residents of Warsaw and Berlin. We believe that, if the case under Article 354.1 Part 4 CC was specifically based on these statements, then, similarly to the case against Zharikov, it was initiated without proper grounds.

We also view as inappropriate the prosecution of St. Petersburg historian Dmitry Vitushkin under the same Parts 2 and 4 of Article 354.1 CC. The case was based on his comments in December 2022 to a post in the Ingermanlandia group on VKontakte. The investigation considers Vitushkin to be the administrator of this online community. The post itself dealt with the biography of the Finnish sniper Simo Häyhä, who took part in the Soviet-Finnish War of 1939–1940. Among other details, the post mentioned the sniper's accuracy and heroism. A dispute ensued among the post’s commenters, whether the publication was a “glorification” of the allies of Nazi Germany who took part in the siege of Leningrad during the Great Patriotic War. One of the commenters received a response from the group’s administrators that Simo Häyhä was “a worthy example to follow,” since by killing Soviet soldiers he “defended his homeland from the occupiers, who were allies of Nazi Germany.” The investigation found that the comments posted by the administrator of Ingermanlandia “are a denial and falsification of historical facts established by the International Tribunal in Nuremberg” that “discredits the liberation of Leningrad from the fascist invaders,” thereby insulting the memory of the defenders of the Fatherland. Vitushkin has been sent to a pre-trial detention center.

Persecution against Religious Organizations and Believers

Jehovah's Witnesses

Sanctions against Jehovah's Witnesses continued in October on the charges of involvement in the activities of local religious organizations that were recognized as extremist and banned.

We are aware of five sentences issued in October against seven believers.

On October 13, the Sovetsky District Court of Oryol sentenced Jehovah's Witnesses Vladimir Piskarev, Vladimir Melnik and Artur Putintsev to six years in a minimum-security penal colony with one and a half years of restriction of freedom under Article 282.2 Part 1 CC (organizing the activities of an extremist organization).
On October 16, the Zheleznovodsk City Court of Stavropol Krai sentenced 83-year-old Zinaida Minenko to a fine of 330 thousand rubles under Article 282.2 Part 1.1 CC (involvement of others in the activities of an extremist organization). Zinaida Minenko has a Group I disability due to vision impairment.
On October 20, the Porkhovsky District Court of the Pskov Region sentenced Alexei Khabarov under Article 282.2 Part 2 of CC (participating in the activities of an extremist organization) to two and a half years of imprisonment to be served in a minimum-security penal colony. This sentence was issued to the believer following the third trial of his case. Earlier, in September 2021, the same court issued a suspended sentence to Khabarov, but in November of the same year, the Pskov Regional Court overturned it and sent the case for a new trial with a different court composition, which completely acquitted Khabarov in June 2022. However, the prosecutor's office appealed this decision, and in November 2022, the Pskov Regional Court overturned the acquittal: so the case ended up in the district court once again.
On October 23, the Uray City Court of Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug-Yugra sentenced Andrei Sazonov to a fine of 450 thousand rubles. He was found guilty under Article 282.2 Part 1 and Article 282.3 Part 1 CC (financing extremist activities). In December 2021, the same court found Sazonov guilty and fined him 500 thousand rubles. In May 2022, the court of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug-Yugra overturned the verdict and sent the case for a new trial with a different court composition.
On the same day, October 23, the Zavodsky District Court of Kemerovo issued a six-year suspended sentence to 60-year-old Vladimir Baikalov under Article 282.2 Part 1 CC.

It should also be noted that, on October 30, the Yaroslavl Regional Court reviewed appeals against the sentence issued to four Jehovah's Witnesses by the Dzerzhinsky District Court of Yaroslavl on August 3 of this year and commuted the sentences for two of them. The court of first instance issued a suspended sentence of six and a half years to Pyotr Filiznov and Andrei Vyushin finding them guilty under Article 282.2 Part 1 CC. However, the regional court changed the qualification to Part 2 of the same article and issued to Filiznov and Vyushin a suspended sentence of two and a half years. The appellate court upheld the same punishment originally assigned to Alexander Kuznetsov and Maria Kuznetsova under Part 2.

In October, information appeared about several new cases of criminal prosecution against believers.

On October 5, it was reported that a criminal case had been opened in the Amur Region under Article 282.2 Part 1 CC against Yevgeny Sokolov, who is already on trial under Article 282.2 CC in Voronezh. The case was initiated back in December 2022 in connection with the activities undertaken by Sokolov in the city of Zeya.
On October 12, we were informed of a criminal case under Parts 1.1 and 2 of Article 282.2 CC opened against a 55-year-old Jehovah's Witness from Cherkessk; she was placed under house arrest.
On the same day, new search raids against Jehovah's Witnesses were reported in Crimea. The investigative actions took place in the houses of four residents of the Simferopolsky District. 26-year-old believer Mark L. has become a suspect under Article 282.2 CC Part 1, while 46-year-old Alexander K., 39-year-old Ivan Ye. and 61-year-old Yuri L. face charges under Article 282.3 CC.

In addition, on October 4, the Adlersky District Court placed Ukrainian citizen Alexei Svirid, born in Tver under arrest for 10 days under Article 20.29 CAO (mass distribution of extremist materials). The case against Svirid was based on a video he had distributed via a messenger, which contained the link to the main Jehovah’s Witnesses website. This site was recognized as extremist in late 2014 and was included in the Federal List of Extremist Materials in 2015 as No. 2904. There is no clear justification for classifying a reference to a website’s URL inside a video (apparently without an active link) as a distribution of prohibited material.