A brief ceremony was at the holding center where Konstantin Kotov awaits transfer to a penal colony.

Memorial Human Rights Centre, in accordance with international guidelines defining the term ‘political prisoner,’ has recognized Anna Pavlikova and Konstantin Kotov as political prisoners.

Anna Pavlikova was born on 27 March 2000. A resident of the city of Moscow, she completed secondary education and worked as a veterinary attendant. She was charged with creating an extremist group, “New Greatness,” (Novoe Velichie) in December 2017, allegedly for the purposes of the violent overthrow of the government and constitutional order of Russia (Article 282.1 of the Russian Criminal Code). Anna Pavlikova was held in custody from March 15 to August 16 2018 when she was placed under house arrest.

Having attentively studied the materials of the New Greatness case, the Human Rights Centre Memorial has concluded that this group was, essentially, set up by Russian security services. It was them who strove to give the organization an extremist character.

With the help of Ruslan D., evidently an agent of the law enforcement agencies (probably the FSB), the security services themselves drew up the charter and program of the New Greatness in such a way that it appeared to be an extremist organization. They also rented an office for the group that was bugged. When Anna Pavlikova left the group because of a quarrel, the agent persuaded her to return. However, one month later she was arrested. Pavlikova has since spent six months in pre-trial detention, with serious injury to her health.

Despite the efforts of the provocateurs, the political program, charter and leaflets of the New Greatness contain no specific statements or provisions indicating that its members intend to overthrow the government by violent means or change the constitutional order of Russia by violence. Texts published on the organization’s website contain no direct calls to violence.

Konstantin Kotov, a 34-year-old computer programmer and civic activist, was detained not far from his home and taken to the Moscow headquarters of the Investigative Committee on the evening of August 12, 2019. Kotov was charged with an offence under Article 212.1 of the Russian Criminal Code “Repeated violation of the regulations for organizing a public assembly, rally, demonstration, march or picket”, and his apartment was searched at night without a court order.

On August 15, 2019 Kotov’s lawyer, Maria Eismont, reported that the case investigator had informed her the investigation was completed and the case was sent to court. The unprecedentedly short preliminary investigation in this case therefore took less than 50 hours. Moreover, the next day the judge Abramova restricted the time for Kotov and his lawyer to study the materials in the criminal case. In other words, the judge allotted 72 hours for examination of the four volumes of the criminal case, of which 48 hours fell on a weekend, thereby still further restricting Kotov’s right to a legal defense.

Kotov received four-year prison sentence for taking part in three protests in support of political prisoners, calling in a Facebook post for people to join a protest on Trubnaya Square on 19 July 2019 against opposition candidates being prevented from standing in the upcoming elections to Moscow city assembly, and taking part in a protest walk on 10 August 2019 after the rally that day against political repression and for the registration of independent candidates in the Moscow city assembly elections.

The very fact of prosecution under Article 212.1 of the Russian Criminal Code, which is unconstitutional and in violation of legal norms, gives grounds to conclude the prosecution of Konstantin Kotov is unlawful and politically motivated. Article 212.1, like Article 20.2, Section 8, of the Russian Administrative Law Code “Repeated violation by a participant in a public event of the established regulations for holding a picket”, contradicts fundamental legal principles and is intended to restrict freedom of assembly and force government critics to cease their public activity.

Political motivation of the Kotov’s prosecution is shown by the fact that the peaceful protest, in which he took part of, were against the policies of the current authorities, and his prosecution took place amid a sharp increase in repressive measures against participants in peaceful demonstrations and rallies. The little time in which the preliminary investigation was conducted (and during which Kotov was not given a single minute of confidential communication with his lawyer) made a mockery of due process. Moreover, it made clear the authorities intend to use the Kotov case as a precedent to put pressure on the organizers of, and participants in, Moscow protests against the refusal to register independent candidates in the upcoming assembly elections.

Memorial Human Rights Centre (HRC), in line with international guidelines defining the term ‘political prisoner,’ considers Eduard Malyshevsky and Nikita Chirtsov political prisoners. We demand their immediate release and that those responsible for their unlawful prosecution be held to account. We also demand the prosecution of those responsible for the violent dispersal of peaceful protesters by who are critics of the authorities in Moscow and other regions of Russia.

On July 30, 2019, a criminal investigation was opened into rioting in Moscow that allegedly took place on July 27 2019 during a protest against the refusal to allow opposition candidates to take part in elections to the Moscow City Duma. The protest was attended by many thousands but had lacked ‘official permission.’ Sixteen persons have been charged.

Eduard Malyshevsky and Nikita Chirtsov were the last to be detained (on August 30 and September 2, respectively). They have been charged under Article 318, Section 1, of the Russian Criminal Code (‘Using force against a public official without endangering life or health’).

According to the investigation, Malyshevsky smashed a window on a police bus, causing pain to police officer D. Astafiev when glass fell on him. Chirtsov, according to the Investigative Committee, pushed a police sergeant, causing him pain.

The facts of ‘violence’ with which Eduard Malyshevsky and Nikita Chirtsov have been charged are baseless. In smashing the window of a police van Malyshevsky clearly had no intention to use force and police officer D. Astafiev, who allegedly felt pain from the glass falling on him, testified that he received no injury. It is also impossible to consider the pushing of a police sergeant by Nikita Chirtsov an act of violence. Moreover, it must be acknowledged that these incidents happened in spontaneous reaction to the unlawful violence of the police against demonstrators.

Memorial’s representatives were at the scene of the events on July 27, 2019 and have carefully examined video recordings of the protest, including the ‘clashes’ between demonstrators and police and other materials of the case.
They are convinced that the protest was peaceful in nature.

According to Article 31 of the Russian Constitution, freedom of peaceful assembly is one of the most important civic rights. The authorities must facilitate the conduct of assemblies and protect their security. On July 27, 2019 they did the opposite: they hindered a peaceful protest, broke it up, detained some 1,500 participants and used force. Unlawful obstruction of a rally, demonstration or assembly is punishable under Article 149 of the Russian Criminal Code by deprivation of liberty for up to three years.

Memorial HRC is certain, given the way in which the criminal investigation was conducted, that the intent of the authorities has been to intimidate participants in protests with a view to ending such protests and to intimidate the opposition.

Members of the opposition who were jailed were practically declared guilty in advance of any court hearing. The mayor of Moscow, as well as, indirectly, the press secretary of the president of Russia, declared there had been riots in Moscow, thereby putting pressure on the law enforcement agencies and the courts. State television and other pro-government media reported the falsehood that there had been ‘rioting’ and branded the protesters as criminals.

The fact that, under pressure from the public, charges against a number of individuals have been dropped only confirms that these charges were based not on law but were politically motivated.

Case Description

In September 2018, the head of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov, and the head of Ingushetia Yunus-Bek Evkurov signed an agreement redefining the border between the two regions, according to which Ingushetia would transfer seven percent of its territory to Chechnya. The agreement was prepared in secret without public discussion. The signing of the agreement ignited a widespread movement of protest against this agreement.

On March 26, 2019 in Magas, the capital of Ingushetia, 20,000 people took part in a rally demanding resignation of the head of the region, as well as resignation of the heads of the region’s parliament and holding a free and fair elections. The authorities gave permission for the rally to be held in the course of one day, but the participants declared that the rally would become indefinite. On the morning of March, 27, several hundred people remained on the square. They presented no threat to public order. However, troops of the National Guard [RosGvardiya] tried to disperse the crowd. Protesters resisted and ten law enforcement officers were injured.

A criminal investigation was opened and about thirty activists were arrested. Six leaders of the Ingush opposition were charged with an offence under Article 33, Section3, and Article 318, Section 2, of the Russian Criminal Code (organisation of violence that endanger life or health of public officials on duty; punishable by up to 10 years of imprisonment). Memorial Human Centre declared them political prisoners. We demand that officials guilty of the unlawful prosecution of the Ingush opposition leaders be brought to justice.

Grounds for declaring the case politically motivated

Investigators cite three ‘facts’ demonstrating the guilt of those ‘ who organized  the crime’:

1) About 400 protesters remained at the location of the rally and declared that they would not disperse until their demands had been met as a result of a decision by Barakhoev, Malsagov, Nalgiev, Uzhakhov and Chemurziev.

2) The five leaders ‘issued calls to national unity’ and ‘took steps to unite’ the people present on the square, morally supporting them, saying that soon new participants in the rally would arrive. They also called on the protesters to stand firm if the law enforcement officers tried to break up the rally.

3) Barakhoev, speaking at the rally on March 27 to the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ingushetia, Dmitry Kava, and other representatives of law enforcement agencies, stated that resistance by force to representatives of authority was possible.

Under Russian criminal law, an offence is only committed if the organizer of a crime acts with direct intention. Not one of the above circumstances cited by the investigators shows the opposition leaders had any such intention, i.e. that they wished for and incited violence.

There is no evidence that they intended to cause harm to the health of public officials, sought to bring that about, organized or led it.

Judging by videos of the events and the evidence of witnesses, the Ingush leaders urged the protesters to depart and not to allow clashes with law enforcement officers.

Thus on one video made on the morning of 27 March, the elder Akhmed Barakhoev, standing next to others who have also been charged, is seen telling protesters: «So that no harm will be done to us. So that no blood will be spilled. These lads, who are opposing us — they also have fathers and mothers waiting for them at home. These are people who were ordered to come here. We don’t need either their blood or our blood to be spilled. We did not come here to spill blood or to fight. We have talked with the authorities and they promised they will permit another rally. We have submitted the required notification… I shall go forwards, and you will all follow me. Let us remember God Almighty and we shall all leave. We shall leave here unbroken!»

Members of a working group consisted of human rights organizations (including Memorial Human Rights Centre) that worked at the scene of events in April 2019 concluded: «We have the impression that the decision to use force was made at a level higher than the head of the Republic of Ingushetia. A minimal knowledge of local specifics would have been enough to prevent law enforcement officers from other regions being sent out against the crowd that included elderly men — this caused aggression among young people and clashes occurred. Only the competent and responsible behavior by officers from a local battalion of traffic police made up of residents of Ingushetia enabled the situation to be defused. These officers saved RosGvardiya officers who had been knocked over and injured, pulling them away from the square, separating other RosGvardiya officers from the crowd, and thereby stopping clashes. Jointly with opposition leader Akhmed Barakhoev, they then persuaded young people to voluntarily leave the square.»

Based on the documents gathered during  the investigation and on the circumstances of the event, we conclude that the opposition leaders did not organize acts of violence and there is no basis for the charges brought against them.

The charges against Gadzhiev are:

• The editor of Religious Affairs at an independent Dagestani newspaper Chernovik was detained on 14 June 2019. He has been charged under Article 205.5, Section 2 (Participation in the activity of a terrorist organisation, punishment – up to 20 years in prison) and Article 205.1, Section 4, of the Russian Criminal Code (Financing of terrorism, punishment – life imprisonment).
• According to the investigators, after publishing an article in Chernovik about the work of Ansar, a charitable foundation to assist children, Abdulmumin Gadzhiev encouraged readers to donate money to this organisation which, the investigators said, had transferred money to Islamic State (a terrorist organisation banned in Russia). The founder of Ansar Abu Umar Sasitlinsky rejects these allegations.

Why Memorial Human Rights Centre considers Gadzhiev innocent:

• Ansar was an organisation operating during 2013-14. During that time Chernovik published one piece by Gadzhiev, dated May 7, 2013 (the time when the Islamic State had not yet been proclaimed, nor, consequently, banned in Russia) in which Ansar was mentioned. This was an interview with Abu Umar Sasitlinsky in which Abu Umar talked about founding the organisation and its work providing humanitarian aid to Syrian refugees. The Investigative Committee did not provided any other ‘evidence’ of the journalist’s guilt.
• In 2016, Abdulmumin Gadzhiev wrote a deeply perceptive article for Chernovik in which he condemned the crimes of militant fighters who considered themselves part of Islamic State in Dagestan. 

• According to the transcript of an interrogation of Kemal Tambiev, a Moscow resident, Tambiev learned from correspondence with another person that Gadzhiev, whom he apparently did not know, was a participant in Islamic State and raised funds for that organisation’s activities. Tambiev himself has stated that he signed the protocol of his interrogation under torture. According to Tambiev, he had not said anything about Gadzhiev during his interrogation. Kemal Tambiev appeared in court with a large bruise around his eye. Moreover, the day he was detained, as law enforcement officers were transporting him from Moscow to Makhachkala, passengers on the plane photographed him with severe bruising on his face.

A politically motivated prosecution:

• The day when Gadzhiev was arrested, Chernovik’s editors issued the following statement: ‘In the North Caucasus, a charge of funding terrorism is similar to planting drugs on Ivan Golunov in Moscow. If one wants to jail a person who is even slightly involved in religious activity, then a reason can be always found. Abdulmumin Gadzhiev is one of the longest-serving staff members at Chernovik. His articles have always received a positive reaction from readers, and been widely discussed. And Gadzhiev has known very well that there were certain law enforcement officers who always looked for reasons to get him and put him behind bars.’
• Chernovik, a weekly independent newspaper, often publishes outspoken pieces critical of the authorities. In September 2009, flyers containing threats against journalists, lawyers and civic activists were distributed in Makhachkala. Anonymous authors (reportedly, law enforcement officers) listed 16 names, including that of the founder of Chernovik, Khadzhimurad Kamalov. On 15 December 2011 Kamalov was shot dead. The crime remains unsolved.

‘The charges contain declarative and propagandistic passages about the “peace-making” role of Russia in Syria, the economic losses of major Russian companies in that region, and so on. The charges contain no evidence that Gadzhiev had any intention either of taking part in the activities of a terrorist organisation or of funding terrorism,’ Galina Tarasova, a lawyer with Memorial Human Rights Centre, said. 

In accordance with international guidelines defining the term ‘political prisoner,’ Memorial Human Rights Center (HRC), has recognized Pavel Ustinov as a political prisoner. Memorial HRC demands the immediate release of Ustinov, and others, who were unlawfully detained and assaulted in the public events of July and August 2019, and further demands that those guilty of violating the rights and freedoms of participants and bystanders be brought to justice.

On August 3, 2019, a protest was held in Moscow calling for independent candidates to be registered in the Moscow City Assembly elections. Participants were also protesting the mass detentions, beatings, and jailing on remand of those who took part in the protest of July 27, 2019. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, and as had happened the previous week, the police and National Guard carried out mass detentions of both participants and bystanders. In all, 1,001 people were arrested that day – a significant number of them were bystanders who had not taken part in the protest. One of detainees was actor Pavel Ustinov who, judging from information obtained by Memorial HRC, had been quietly waiting for a friend at the entrance of a metro station and took no part in the protest. At about 15:30, riot police officers roughly detained Ustinov and according to media reports, one of the officers dislocated their left shoulder during the arrest.

Investigators allege that Ustinov actively resisted riot police officers and intentionally used force that was dangerous to an officer’s life and health and resulted in a riot police officer suffering a dislocated left shoulder. Memorial HRC, however, having analyzed video footage posted by Ustinov’s sister, has concluded that Ustinov is innocent. Based on this footage, there is no evidence in Ustinov’s actions to indicate the crime of an intentional act of violence against a representative of public authority. It is plain to see that Ustinov’s movements were reflex actions and were in no way aggressive, while the riot officers detaining him used force and non-lethal weapons excessively in that situation.

In the remand court hearing the defendant stated: “I physically could not cause harm to a person three times stronger than me. I did not take part in the protest rally and had no intention to cause harm. I was standing out of the way. In one hand I had a telephone, in the other headphones. They twisted my arms behind my back and began to beat me with non-lethal weapons. I did not resist once.” Nonetheless, on August 5, 2019, Ustinov was remanded in custody by decision of the judge of Moscow’s Tverskoy district court, M.V. Sizintseva.

The political nature of Ustinov’s prosecution follows from investigator Zavarzin’s request that the court choose a preventive measure for Ustinov in the form of detention, arguing – without evidence – that Ustinov allegedly had been “an active participant in illegal protests in Moscow city.” The political motivation for the criminal case can also be seen in the context of a sharp increase in repressive measures against those taking part in peaceful demonstrations and rallies, and against bystanders who happen to be in locations where large numbers of arrests are being made. The mass arrests that took place throughout downtown Moscow on August 3, 2019 were arbitrary and a violation of human rights. There was no justification for them in terms of public security.

The most egregious aspect is how the investigation based its position on word-for-word testimonies of riot police officers A.R. Savchenko and K.A. Astashev. In the opinion of leaders at Memorial HRC, the court should recognize such evidence as unacceptable, and circumstances of their “interrogation” should be investigated for possible violation in accordance with part 2 of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Falsification of evidence in a criminal case by the interrogator, investigator, prosecutor, or defense attorney.”) It is obvious that such a comprehensive textual coincidence in their testimonies means the interrogation was either not conducted or the “witnesses” read out reports that had been prepared earlier, drawn up on the orders of a senior officer (as happens in the preparation of cases against those accused of violating the norms of the Code of Administrative Law of the Russian Federation at demonstrations). It is significant that the interrogations of Savchenko (19 minutes) and Astashev (20 minutes) took virtually the same amount of time.