Цитаты
Человек должен заново открыть в своей душе глубочайший смысл ответственности перед миром, что означает ответственность перед чем-то высшим, чем сам человек. Вацлав Гавел |
|
|
|
|
The public prosecutors discussed the extremism problems
|
|
|
|
 Member of the Public chamber of RF, director of Moscow bureau for human rights Alexander Brod took part in scientific-practical conference “Relevant problems of counteraction to extremism. Improvememt of mechanisms for cooperation of anti-extremist activity subjects” that took place on April 29 in Yekaterinburg.
The conference assembled the public prosecutors of Russian regions, representatives of the Ministry of home affairs (MVD) of RF, and leading experts. The governor of Sverdlovsk region E. Rossel participated in the conference.
The conference was opened by the General public prosecutor of RF Yu. Chaika. During the plenary meeting the following spoke: deputy general public prosecutor V. Grin, plenipotentiary of the RF President in Ural federal district N. Vinnichenko, chairman of the committee on civil, criminal, arbitral and remedial legislation of the State Duma P. Krasheninnikov, head of Department of MVD of RF on counteraction to extremism Yu. Kokov etc.
A. Brod: “Alarming figures were made public during the conference: in 2008 460 crimes of extremist orientation were recorded in Russia; rate of growth was 29,2% in comparison with 2007. 379 persons that committed crimes of this category were revealed. At the same time, while in 2007 every fourth crime of extremist orientation remained undetected, in 2008 their weight decreased down to 19,3%, and this may be the evidence of overcoming of negative tendency in detection of crimes of this category observed since 2004. The reporters noted that procedurally competent fixing of proofs and expansion of evidential basis including that through the method of examination of extremist character materials, are necessary for intituting criminal proceedings against the persons guilty of committing extremist orientation crimes.
At the same time the presented documents of the Office of general public prosecutor state that “under conditions of keen attention towards combat against extremism, extreme “enthusiasm” concerning estimation of deeds as “extremist ones” and illegitimate aspiration to report about successes in responding to extremist activity take place””.
General public prosecutor of Russia Yuri Chaika considers the crimes motivated by xenophobia and other extremist manifestations the threat for national security of the country. In his opininon, in all its manifestations the extremism is one of factors for destabilizing the situation in the society, threat for national integrity, and this gives birth to separatist moods in some subjects of the Federation and causes the reality of terrorist acts: “The extremist manifestations are based as a rule upon ideological views, xenophobia, ethnic and religious intolerance”.
In the opinion of the General public prosecutor, “efficient state system of counteraction to this evil” must be created for efficient combat against extremism. As Yu. Chaika noted, this system “includes first of all conduction of preventive work, improvement of legislation in this sphere and close cooperation with the civil society institutions”.
The plenipotentiary of the President N. Vinnichenko told that more than 200 various ethnic groups reside in the Ural federal district. For tracking of activity of extremist organizations and movements and further counteraction to them, permanent monitoring is executed and specially created inter-departmental commission is working. Besides, in 2007 the Civil forum was created uniting more than 40 public organizations. One of principal goals of the Forum is counteraction to extremism and interethnic dissension.
Several examples of intolerance manifestations were also cited. Thus, in Tyumen region interethnic tension appeared after gastarbeiters from Uzbekistan couldn’t get their salary for a long time. N. Vinnichenko noted that such facts can promote the growth of extremism. Arsons of temples in Sverdlovsk region became another example of intolerance; during the investigation the people belonging to pro-fascist group were detained.
The plenipotentiary noted that the problem of youth extremism is still most urgent in Ural federal district. Thus, in 2008 the activity of a large neo-fascist organization was revealed in the Middle Urals.
N. Vinnichenko noted the necessity to conduct the monitoring of the Internet permanently and thouroughly concerning statements of extremist orientation and appeals toward ethnic dissension. But he stressed that the notion of extremism itself should be made specific with this purpose as its frame is still not yet specified and it does not reflect the essence of the problem.
The plenipotentiary proposed the concrete measures that could reduce the probability of extremist crimes. Thus, in his oipinion, the criminal responsibility for extremism should be envisaged as responsibility for especially grave crimes – and correspondingly the punishment should be also more strict.
Specially trained staff of the home affairs bodies must suppress the facts of extremism and interethnic dissension; the skill of such employees should be obligatorily improved. N. Vinnichenko advised to introduce special courses at schools and in the colleges that would cultivate rejeciton of extremism and interethnic dissension.
Deputy general public prosecutor of RF V. Grin informed that the growth of crimes committed basing upon interethnic hatred is noted this year. Most of such facts are recorded in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Sverdlovsk and Novosibirsk regions, Tatarstan. There number in the Ural federal district increased five times.
Yu. Chaika agreed with the proposal to arrange special bodies in the federal districts that would work over the extremism problem. He assured that this proposal would be examined before long.
During the plenary meeting A. Brod told about the data of MBHR monitoring, shared the experience of cooperation between NGOs, the Public chamber of RF and the bodies of office of public prosecutor, and made public the recommendations of the RF Public chamber “On tolerance and counteraction to intolearnce and extremism in Russian society”.
A. Brod also presented the MBHR conclusion concerning Enactment of Office of general public prosecutor of RF, MVD of RF and FSB of RF dated December 16, 2008 No 270/27r, 1/9789,38 “On improvement of work for prevention and suppression of activity of public and religious associations directed at disseminaiton of ideas of ethnic dissension and religious extremism”.
“The enactment looks important and timely as religious and interethnic extremism in Russia reached the level threatenening public safety. In this situation special role is entrusted toward law-enforcement bodies including those of office of public prosecutor for protection of citizens from extremist manifestations.
A set of measures for improvement of work of the office of public prosecutor is envisaged in the document. At the same time the document does not reflect some items being essential in our opinion:
1. The notion of “extremism” itself used in the documant is not made specific. The extremist activity has lots of forms depending on which corresponding actions of law-enforcement bodies are required. In particular, the document mentions extremism on websites but says nothing about numerous publications in printed mass media inciting inter-religous and interethnic dissension, about necessity of efficient response of public prosecutors to the activity of authors, publishers and disseminators of such publications.
2. Except radical-Islamist ideology, the reviving ideology of neo-Nazism being most dangerous concerning incitement of inter-religious and interethnic relations should be mentioned and also the skinhead community as the bearers of this ideology should be named.
3. Together with the mentioned circumstance that big number of illegal labor migrants and persons without citizenship are available in Russian Federation at present, the increasing migrant-phobia should be noted as one of extremism directions as well as growth of crimes against migrants including legal ones.
4. Nothing is said in the document about necessity of cooperation of the bodies of office of public prosecutor with non-governmental public and rights defending organizations, with enlightenment-educational and cultural institutions, and this is the necessary condition for success in overcoming of dangerous tendencies in the country.
5. In our opinion, an essential shortcoming of judicial bodies’ activity are the punishments for crimes committed basing upon interethnic and inter-religious tension being often too light (short terms of imprisonment or suspended sentences). In this connection we propose supplementing some propositions in the document with one more propostion (in corresponding judicial edition): “During the legal proceedings the bodies of office of public prosecutor should insist on maximally strict punishment toward the people accused of extremist activity and crimes motivated by inter-religious and interethnic hostility”.
A. Brod noted that intolerance and conflicts motivated by aggressive xenophobia appear in the places where unfavorable social-economic situaiton is combined with poor management as well as when the politicians and marginal ideologists of hatred use ethnic and religious factors for achievement of power and their populist purposes.
During the conference the work of two sections took place: “Legal problems of counteraction to extremism: theory and practice” and “Practical problems in law-enforcement practice of observing the legislation on counteraction to extremist activity” participated by representatives of the Academy of Office of general public prosecutor, Research institute of MVD of RF and Scientific research center of FSB of RF. |
|
