The state prosecution requested 25 years in a strict regime colony for oppositionist and journalist Vladimir Kara-Murza (recognized as a foreign agent in the Russian Federation). He has been in jail for almost a year now. Kara-Murza is accused of collaborating with an undesirable organization, spreading fake news about the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and treason. The case is being considered behind closed doors due to the presence of classified materials in the case. And here’s what we know about him.
Vladimir Kara-Murza pleads not guilty to any of the charges and considers his persecution to be politically motivated. The defendant’s lawyer, Vadim Prokhorov, confirmed to Business FM that the prosecution saw treason precisely in his client’s public speeches.
At the same time, Vladimir Kara-Murza became the first person in Russia to be tried under the article on treason in its new edition. And this edition, according to Alexander Zabeyda, a partner at the Zabeyda and Partners Law Office, really allows you to initiate a case of treason only on the basis of what has been said publicly:
– Alas, the fact is that this norm, in terms of the degree of its specificity, turned out to be drawn up even more rubberily than the fraud that is used today against entrepreneurs. Since today there is no register of the type of assistance that is directed against the security of the Russian Federation, so that citizens can know exactly what actions the Motherland can regard as treason. In addition, the norm in the current wording does not indicate how much this assistance should be real or useful for a foreign state. That is, citizens speaking to foreigners should take into account that in order for the crime of treason to be recognized as having taken place, there should not necessarily be any negative consequences, just the fact of expressing an opinion that is unpleasant for the Russian authorities to a foreign audience is enough. And there is one more detail that, in my opinion, is worth paying attention to, since, unlike other articles imputed to the oppositionist, this article has a limited subject composition, that is, it can only change to holders of Russian passports, that is, to citizens of the Russian Federation. This article does not apply to foreigners and stateless persons.
– What does it say?
– This suggests that, let’s say, citizens of the Russian Federation should be much more attentive to their own statements than people who do not have Russian citizenship, or who have renounced it in the manner prescribed by law.
According to the defenders of Vladimir Kara-Murza, 25 years is the maximum that could be requested under these articles for a person with no previous convictions. The term requested for Kara-Murza is commented on by political scientist Konstantin Kalachev:
“The main question in all this is why, what next? In fact, what lessons should society learn from this verdict? I understand that few people care about the image of Russia in the West now, and on the contrary, I want to show that the “fifth column” is dealt with here in the most cruel way, but I wonder how Russian society will react to all this? Because you understand, the question is not only in the verdict, the question is how this verdict is perceived. How fair, how unfair, how unmotivated, how politically engaged, or how a punishment for a traitor? I don’t know the answer to this question, but I repeat, it seems to me that this whole story is didactic in nature, in principle it is from the particular to the general, that is, the tougher, the brighter the example for the rest.
On Friday, in the debate of the parties in the Moscow City Court, the defense of Vladimir Kara-Murza is to speak. His lawyers, noting the unprecedented pace of the consideration of the case, do not exclude that on the same day Kara-Murza will be given the opportunity to voice the last word, after which the court will retire to the deliberation room to pass the verdict.