Paul Goble
Staunton,
December 18 – Natalya Smirnova and Denis Shedov of the Open Democracy Movement
have prepared a 60,000-wordd report on how the Russian authorities have used
their powers within the law and beyond it to reject applications by opposition
groups to hold demonstrations (ovdinfo.org/reports/iskusstvo-zapreta).
The two point out that “from the
point of view of Russian law, any spontaneous action is illegal if more than one
person takes part in it. People must warn the organs of power in advance about
their plans so that the authorities can provide security” and ensure that all
necessary conditions are met.
Russian law speaks only about the need to
inform the authorities, but in fact, Smirnova and Shedov say, it gives the authorities
the power to block demonstrations for both justifiable and “absurd” reasons
whenever they want to, a situation that is becoming worse as legislators impose
ever harsher punishments on those who take part in “illegal” actions.
As a result, they continue, “the procedure of giving
agreement has become a hidden instrument for the management of meetings and
pickets by the organs of the authorities. And while remaining hidden, it
defines” how or even whether any action will occur and what will happen to
those who report about it or take part in it.
Their
report documents hundreds of cases in which the authorities misread or misapply
the requirements the law imposes on organizers to apply for approval in
advance, showing how each of the nine requirements can be used by the powers
that be to throw up obstacles to prevent demonstrations.
Some
of these problems arise from gaps in the law, but most appear to arise from the
powers of officials to ignore the law altogether when it suits their purposes,
Smirnova and Shedov suggest. And the Meduza news agency underscores this with a
list of “the strangest reasons” officials have invoked to block meetings (meduza.io/short/2018/12/18/samye-strannye-povody-dlya-zapreta-oppozitsionnyh-aktsiy-v-rossii-v-odnoy-kartinke).
These include:
·
“The
slogans are not specific.”
·
“Participants
in the meeting would get in the way of trash collections.”
·
“The
meeting would interfere with water line work that began only three days after
the application for a meeting was filed.”
·
“The
meeting is to be held where a demonstration on the 70th anniversary
of Victory Day is to take place two months later.”
·
“The
meeting would interfere with fire drills.”
·
“The
meeting on Victory Square would interfere with snow collection on Karl Marx
Square.”
No comments:
Post a Comment