The Supreme Court clarified the procedure for dealing with cases with reposts and huskies
Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of Russia Vladimir Davydov
Today it became known about the resolution of the plenum of the RF Supreme Court that specified the procedure for dealing with cases of extremist orientation, including reposts and huskies in social networks. Kommersant reports , that judges are now asked to find out whether the accused had a direct intention to incite hatred and enmity. In addition, judges should assess whether the placement of contentious information was socially dangerous.
According to the Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the current judicial practice needs to be adjusted. The plenum adopted amendments to the resolution of the plenum of the RF Armed Forces dated June 2? 2011 "On judicial practice in criminal cases on crimes of an extremist nature" . In general, the essence of the amendments can be explained by one of the phrases of Davydov's speech: "The fact of placing extremist information, reposting, or even some kind of likes, can not become the basis for instituting criminal proceedings."
The resolution also said that monitoring of law enforcement in cases of likes and reposts has been ongoing since 2016. In that year, some problems were identified and appropriate adjustments were made. Two years have passed, and now the deputy chairman believes that the time has come to return to this resolution.
Under the new rules, immediately after the initiation of a criminal case under article 282 (inciting hatred or enmity), the person involved may file a complaint. In this case, judges are asked to carefully check the presence of not only an excuse, but also the grounds for initiating a criminal case. This includes not only the fact of posting information, but also any other information that indicates the public danger of the act and its motive.
In addition, the plenum of the Supreme Council recalled that in order to qualify the crime under this article it is necessary to establish that the citizen was aware of the direction of his act to violate the foundations of the constitutional system, and also had the goal of inciting hatred or enmity, and humiliating the dignity of the person. In order for the judges to understand well what needs to be paid attention when specifying intent and purpose, the plenum of the Sun helped to understand this by listing the criteria.
In particular, the judges will have to take into account the form and content of the posted information, the context, the author's comments and his other expression of the relationship, the fact of creation or repost. In addition, it is necessary to study the content of the entire user's page on the Internet, information about the user's activities before and after posting information, including attempts to expand the audience.
One of the priorities is to examine the identity of the accused, including data on his adherence to radical ideology, participation in extremist communities, bringing to administrative or criminal responsibility for extremist activities. Moreover, the Plenary Session of the Supreme Council highlighted the need to assess the nature and degree of public danger.
If, for example, the repost of extremist information was made by an Internet user who has few friends on the social network or no one has reacted to the posted message, the judges can decide that this action is of little significance and does not pose a public danger. Unfortunately, there are no exact criteria regarding the number of friends of the accused in the social network or their reaction to the repost. "We tried to clarify universal criteria in order to distinguish crime from not crime. But in every case there will be circumstances, "the representative of the Armed Forces said.
As for the conclusions of the experts, they lose their force - the plenum decided that the expert's conclusion can not have a predetermined strength, nor does it have an advantage over other evidence.
The resolution of the plenum will allow already convicted for reposts and husky to apply for a review of cases. True, this can only be done if it can be established that "an established judicial decision does not meet the criteria."
According to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, last year 783 people were convicted for extremist crimes. Of these, about 580 are according to art. 28? most - for publications on the network. Three of the accused managed to be acquitted, 86 cases were dismissed, and 13 medical measures were applied to 13 citizens. Since 201? the number of people convicted in Russia under the so-called "extremist" articles of the Criminal Code has quadrupled. Among other charges - calls for violence, inciting hatred and discord, the organization of an extremist community.
As for the experts, in their opinion, there are no objective reasons for increasing the indicators. The MVD recognizes the existence of erroneous judicial decisions on "extremist" articles, but I declare that those who harm and shake the situation in the country are brought to justice.
It may be interesting