gaskarov-en

[gaskarov-en]

Alexei Gaskarov: The Robin Hood of Zhukovsky

[gaskarov-en]

Alexei Gaskarov: “If, in this country, the way to freedom runs through prison, we are ready to go”

The verdicts in the second wave of the Bolotnaya Square Case will be announced in Zamoskvoretsky Court in Moscow on August 18. The prosecutor asked the court to sentence Alexander Margolin and Alexei Gaskarov to four years in prison; Ilya Gushchin, to three years and three months in prison; and Elena Kokhtareva, to three years and three months suspended, with four years of probation. All four defendants have been accused under Article 212 Part 2 (involvement in riots) and Article 318 Part 1 (use of non-threatening violence against a public official) of the Russian Federal Criminal Code. On August 4, Alexei Gaskarov made his closing statement in court. This is the complete text of his speech.

The first thing I wanted to talk about is something that was not addressed in the trial, but which I think is important: why on May 6, [2012,] despite everything, so many people decided to be involved in certain events, rather than simply stand another two or three hours in queues, and ultimately did not permit themselves to be beaten with impunity.

The May 6 demonstration was the seventh major event staged by the opposition [during the 2011–2012 fair elections protest movement]. Whereas earlier, before December 2011, a few thousand people attended protest rallies I had witnessed, when you-know-who said the idea of rotating governments was not the best thing for Russia, the core group of protesters increased significantly. And these people did not go organize riots, but went to observe elections in order to understand and record the way the political processes that occur in our country are legitimated.

Everything fell into place on December 4[, 2011]. Despite the fact that the institution of elections had been destroyed much earlier, the large group of people who went to the polls as observers saw how the legitimacy of the current government was shaped. I myself was an observer at those elections, and what we saw was quite straightforward. Indeed, it is a strange situation when you are trying to find at least one person among your acquaintances who would say they voted for United Russia. In fact, such people did not exist: there was no mass support for the government. When they tried to counter the Bolotnaya Square protests with an event on Poklonnaya Hill in support of the current government, they could not gather more than a thousand people.

This subject itself was extremely important, but unfortunately it was not sufficiently popular with the authorities. Fair elections are still the only legal way of changing the political system, and once it has been changed, you can solve social and economic problems. A huge number of people took to the streets. There was almost no reaction on the part of the authorities. The protests were peaceful, the protesters were numerous, and it was obvious the demands they made and the problems they talked about were real, but instead we saw only a reluctance to engage in dialogue and, at some point, flagrant mockery.

A lot of people now do not like what thuggish characters in Ukraine are calling people from Southeast Ukraine. But here in Russia the same thing happened: when people came out on Bolotnaya Square, the country’s president called them Bandar-log and made many other unflattering comparisons. We were told we amounted to only one percent, that only one hundred thousand people in a city of ten million came out to protest, that it meant nothing at all. But later, when they actually allowed a fair poll, as happened during the [September 2013] mayoral election in Moscow, it turned out it was not one percent, but forty percent, a significant segment of society. And I would like to say that we should be glad on the whole that the events on Bolotnaya Square happened as they did.

In all developed democratic countries, protest rallies, the opportunity to express points of view that differ from that of the authorities, generate political competition, which enables countries to find the best way of developing. By the way, certain problems in the Russian economy began precisely in the third quarter of 2012, because it is impossible to build a stable economic and social system when you completely demotivate and exclude such an essential part of society. And it was obvious that this part of society was essential.

The first signal that comes from our case: does the right to protest, which exists in all developed countries, exist at all in Russia? As we see now, Russia has been deprived of this right.

And the second signal, which it is impossible to ignore: has the rule of law survived in Russia? Individuals must be protected from the actions of the authorities not only by a system of checks and balances but also by the possibility of appealing directly to the law in the way in which it is worded. I think this can be seen in our case. There is Article 212 of the Criminal Code: it may be poorly worded, but it is worded the way it is. And it is wrong, I think, to raise such obvious questions at the trial stage, because the law is worded quite clearly. We read a lot of commentaries to the Criminal Code and nowhere did we find that the corpus delicti of “rioting” could be defined alternatively, based on the evidence listed in the charges. Nevertheless, this has been consistently ignored. Even in those decisions entered into the case file, this subject was roundly rejected. In and of itself, the rule of law is the most important of the institutions that protect the rights of individuals from the state. And, of course, we cannot ignore the selective application of the law to citizens. I realize that Russian law is not based on precedent, but it is impossible not to notice that if, for example, you are a nationalist, block roads, and set fire to shops, but refrain from speaking out against the actions of the authorities, you are only guilty of disorderly conduct. If you go to protest rallies where people shout, “Putin is a thief!” you are, accordingly, liable to serious criminal charges.

There is one last point following from our case to which I would also like to draw attention. I think a signal is being sent: if you are loyal to the authorities, you will enjoy the most favorable conditions; if you are disloyal, you will go to jail. This concerns the evaluation of the actions of demonstrators and the actions of police. It is too obvious that not all the police behaved as they should have behaved. I understand this was not specifically the matter in dispute in our case, but not a single criminal case has been opened against the police. Practically speaking, they have tried to turn the police into a caste of untouchables as part of our case. When there was a public debate on the Bolotnaya Square Case, the same phrase always came up: “You cannot hit police.” Even in our group of thirty people charged in the Bolotnaya Square Case, only three people actually struck police officers. And yet the whole complexity of this situation was primitivized through a single phrase: “You cannot hit police.”

But it seems to me this way of posing the question dismisses and completely destroys any criticism of the government. We cannot forget that many terrible things have happened in our country (for example, during the Great Terror), that people in uniform committed all these crimes, and everything they did was legal for all intents and purposes. But now they tell us there should be no critical rethinking of this situation, that it is necessary to stupidly obey the thesis that was endlessly repeated during discussion of our case. The main thing I would like say, your honor, is that I really would not want it to happen that, after our trial, speaking of the law as an expression of the principle of justice became a sign of bad taste. I would hope that our trial did not pursue any other political objectives that have been imposed on it, that have been set for it—and all that is in the case files—but that we be judged for the things we really did. But if in this country the way to freedom runs through prison, we are ready to go. That is all.

http://peopleandnature.wordpress.com/2014/08/06/gaskarov/ http://therussianreader.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/gaskarov-closing-statement/

Originally published, in Russian, at Grani.ru. Photos courtesy of Bolotnoedelo.info.

Afterword (copied from People and Nature‘s first publication of this translation)

On July 24, two other defendants in the Bolotnaya Square case, the left-wing activists Sergei Udaltsov and Leonid Razvozzhayev, were each sentenced to four and a half years in prison on charges arising from the May 6 demonstration. Supporters of Alexei Gaskarov and the other three defendants being sentenced this month fear similarly harsh penalties on August 18.

Solidarity makes a difference in such cases. While the Russian government claims to be championing “antifascism” in Ukraine, it is sending antifascists and other oppositionists in Russia to jail for long periods. The more support for these activists from antifascists internationally, the better.

Please copy and republish this article; demonstrate or protest however you can; write to the Russian embassy; and look on the Free Alexei Gaskarov site and the May 6 Committee site.

[gaskarov-en]

The Opinion of an Antifascist

Gaskarov, unlike the other defendants, decided to testify at the beginning of the trial in order to be able to supplement his testimony as further victims and witnesses are questioned. In addition to police evidence against the young man there are testimonies by three undisclosed witnesses, stressing his involvement with the antifascist movement, "activity aimed at destabilizing the social and political order of the Russian Federation.

Consequently, Gaskarov began his testimony with a clarification regarding his role in the antifascist movement and opposition rallies between December 2011 and May 2012, as well as the difficult relationship with the various law enforcement agencies.

He stated that he became interested in social movements and protest activity while still studying economics at the Government of the Russian Federation’s Finance Academy. After graduation he started working for the nonprofit “Institute for Collective Action" (IKD), publishing studies and information on social protest. "The left and antifascist movements were of interest to me as well. Having my own views, I was dealing with the problem of nationalism in our country too. So it happened that of the 15 people killed in recent years by Nazis for their views, about 10 were my friends", Gaskarov explained, while sporting a t-shirt with the logo of the band What We Feel, known for its antifascist advocacy within youth subculture.

He noted that his activity had long been of interest to the officers of the Interior Ministry’s Counter-Extremism Department (the so-called Center "E"). In 2010, there was an attempt to prosecute him for an attack on the Khimki administration building, which ended in his acquittal. After the trial Gaskarov decided to step back from politics and devote himself to his professional career, taking a position developing investment projects at a consulting agency.

Gaskarov explained that in the course of the 2011 wave of protest against the rigging of parliamentary elections, he started attending opposition rallies. "I still had many activist friends, but I took part in the rallies as an ordinary person", he stressed. Gaskarov travelled to the May 6th rally from his suburban Moscow hometown of Zhukovsky, together with his fiancée Anna Karpova, her parents and several local environmental activists.

Already on Kaluzhskaya Square, Gaskarov noticed people with posters insulting demonstrators, and "openly engaging in provocations." He also noticed that there were far fewer metal detector frames than would be usual for such events. “I am telling you this to clarify the general atmosphere”, Gaskarov said to the judge. Upon reaching Bolotnaya Square, he saw several hundred demonstrators initiating a sit-in to protest the organization of people’s access to the designated rally grounds.

"It seemed to me that despite the fact that the space was narrow, getting through was possible, and that there was no reason to support a sit-in that would cause jamming. Therefore, in light of my own experience, I decided not to join the sit-in and proceeded toward the stage, together with friends”, the defendant continued. “As we walked toward the stage, I saw an unfamiliar man with a megaphone urging people to let a group of anarchists pass through toward the police cordon. I perceived this as a clear provocative action, and called on a few of my friends from that scene, about five or six people, to join me toward the stage. "

  Alexey Gaskarov at Zamoskvoretsky Court. Photo: Dmitry Korotaev / Kommersant

Near the stage Gaskarov saw a police cordon set up. "Even the police didn’t seem to understand why it had been set up exactly where it would create jamming and prevent access to the stage. At one point police began detaining individual protestors. That’s when chaos broke out, as can be seen in the video footage. The crowd swayed from the cordon to Bolshoy Kamenny Bridge and back”, he continued. “From where we were, it wasn’t clear what the matter was; we didn’t know that the crowd had broken through the cordon near Udarnik Theatre. A stampede developed: people at the rear were pressing forward, people were falling. Seeing that people were in danger, I grabbed the hand of victim Bulychev [police officer – editors] and pulled on his arm to provide free passage. It happened in less than a second."

It is precisely this incident that in Gaskarov’s indictment constitutes the charge of "non-lethal violence against a representative of authorities" (Section 1, Article 318 of the Criminal Code). The second instance of alleged use of force against police took place within the cordon, after, according to the antifascist, several police officers had attacked a young man unknown to him and knocked him to the ground.

Gaskarov dragged one of the men of the Second Operative Regiment of the Moscow Police by the leg, away from the detainee. "I had no violent intentions, I only needed to separate them,” he stressed. “I didn’t see him do anything illegal. The police officers weren’t assaulted, only dragged aside."

In a different section of the square, the anti-fascist soon found himself the victim of an attack by OMON officers. “’What are you doing!’, I shouted as they were pushing elderly people and women. That’s when the OMON officers turned on me, striking my head with batons and starting to kick me. I lost consciousness. They didn’t detain me, just beat me and left me lying on the ground. After receiving first aid, my friends and I left the square. In the evening I went to the hospital to get stitches. Afterwards I wrote a letter to the Investigative Committee, which no-one ever acted on, and which died somewhere in inter-agency correspondence", Gaskarov said.

According to the defendant, his whole account of the events is corroborated by two videos, which show what happened during the entire time he was on the square. One was shot by the security forces using the "Wave" complex, and the other for the "Minaev-live” project.

Victim Igor Ibatulin, of the Second Operative Regiment of the Moscow Police came to court in casual dress, wearing loafers, a blue sweatshirt and jeans. On Bolotnaya Square on May 6th, he was serving in one of the pre-established "detention squads." On the square, protesters seized his Jetta protective helmet and broke his nose. His memory of the events is poor. The principle clashes between protestors and police took place away from where police were posted. Unlawful acts that Ibatulin observed around him, he said, were the throwing of rocks toward troops of the Interior Ministry; he heard cries of “Putin is a thief", and "Down with the police state!". “I remember being grabbed by the leg,” the officer said, recalling the role of Gaskarov, whom he had previously identified in video footage.

The second officer questioned in the course of the hearing was not a victim of the defendants’ actions but nonetheless figured as a victim of protestors’ actions. He spoke with difficulty, often pausing for long periods, and answering most questions with "I don’t remember."

After numerous questions for clarification by the defense, Judge Susina declared the hearing adjourned until Thursday.

rusplt.ru

[gaskarov-en]

Putin draws on European experience…

Needless to say, I was a little puzzled by the prison terms requested by the prosecutor's office in the "case of the eight." There was some hope that the absurdity of the charges would be compensated for by less severe punishments. Instead, it is as if they were dealing with particularly dangerous repeat offenders who have committed crimes under aggravating circumstances!

I don’t care at all about the reasoning behind this. Political practicalities cannot restrict rights and freedoms here in Russia, regardless of how violent riots there are in Kiev or anywhere.

First, it should be noted that far from all countries consider mass riots a separate criminal offense. So, what’s it like here? If you look at Article 212, all forms of riots fall under Articles of the criminal code: violence – 112, 115, 116; property destruction -167; armed resistance against representatives of the state - 213, 318; and so forth. In the EU, any rioter would be judged for exactly what he did. In our country besides a specific article (318.1) a person is charged for the exact same set of actions under some additional paragraph, which treats "involvement in riots" as a separate entity, thus imposing double punishment.

Secondly, in those countries where there are similar laws, we’re not looking at anything remotely comparable to our possible prison terms. And there are many examples of this. Germany. In the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Germany, there is a section on “offenses against the public order”, including article 124: “If a crowd forms with the intent of causing harm to persons or property, every participant in those actions shall be punished with imprisonment of up to 2 years, or a fine.” Article 125 deals concretely with punishments against those who committed group violence against physical persons, and setting the maximum sentence at 3 years.

Netherlands. The failure to leave illegal gatherings after the third order by the authorities to do so is considered a criminal offense, and punished with up to three years in jail, or a fine.

France. The article on “unarmed participation in a crowd of people disturbing the public order” sets the punishment at one year of imprisonment, or a fine.

Perhaps these are not entirely correct translations, or this is somewhat outdated, but it’s tricky for me to confirm this more accurately from prison. However, it’s obvious that our article 212, essentially hasn’t changed since it was carried over from the 1960 Criminal Code of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. Then the punishment was between 2 and 15 years (article 79), without differentiating between organizers and participants in considering guilt. But what’s interesting, someone participating in a riot could only be subjected to the stipulations of the additional article if his actions exceeded what was covered under article 79.

In Russia, as we can presently observe, a lemon thrown towards police, leads the state, as represented by the prosecution, to demand a five-year term, and that on metaphysical grounds!

I am convinced that if the actions of the demonstrators on Bolotnaya Square, should be subject to criminal liability, they can be only on the basis of one article. Originally, this was even the opinion of the prosecution, which is why article 212 did not appear until late May. Somehow nobody made a separate case on the basis of article 167 (property destruction). That’s why the requested sentences in no way correspond to the actual level of societal danger, even if we assume that some of the folks charged did something unlawful.

[gaskarov-en]

Alexei Gaskarov’s detention was extended until April 28th, 2014

A session was held in Moscow’s Basmanny District Court to address a motion to extend Alexey Gaskarov’s detention. At this point in the investigation, he faces two criminal charges - participation in riots (Article 212, section 2 of the Criminal Code) and violence against a police officer (Article 318, section 1 of the Criminal Code).

This time the investigator did not cite anything original, but rather repeated exactly what had been used for previous extensions: nothing substantiating that Alexey had led a secretive lifestyle, used conspiratory methods, lead various political youth groups, would evade the authorities or destroy evidence. On May 6th, 2012, Alexey grabbed a police officer and the shoulder of a solider of the Interior Ministry.

Alexei Gaskarov’s lawyers, Dmitry Dinze and Svetlana Sidorkina, objected. Dinze pointed to the complete lack of evidence proving the accusations set forth in the motion, such as an interrogation, physical evidence, a confession by the defendant of having had a secretive lifestyle, used conspiratory methods or possibly wanting to evade prosecution. The court was also shown the defendant’s passport, containing visas, confirming that Gaskarov had no intention to hide, as he would have had the opportunity to leave for other countries in the almost yearlong period between the events on Bolotnaya Square and his arrest.

Dinze questioned the very characterization of Gaskarov’s actions on the Square. As he put it, Gaskarov’s actions were not in fact of a violent nature, as expert opinions show. According to an investigation by Igor Burmistrov, an Interior Ministry expert on tactical training who has reviewed footage from the Square, the violent escalation was provoked by poor and uncoordinated behavior on the part of the police, and judging by his movements and actions, Gaskarov was neither committing violence, nor about to commit violence. But the findings were not included in the case, based on the fabricated reason that the text was lacking in references serving scientific substantiation, and, in spite of the lawyer’s contrary argumentation, the study was declared to be irrelevant for the case.

Alexey’s other lawyer, Svetlana Sidorkina, asked for statements by Alexey’s colleagues, relatives and neighbors, confirming that the reason he did not live at his registered address was that his apartment was under renovation, as well as an evaluation of the property, for possible collateral, to be included in the case material. Judge Natalya Mushnikova granted the motion, adding the testimonies, as well as an appeal by test-pilot Vladimir Kondratenko defending Gaskarov, and signatures of Zhukovsky residents appealing for Alexey to be subjected to measures other than deprivation of liberty.

After his lawyers’ speeches, the defendant himself stepped forth. Alexey tried to explain to the judge that violence against a state representative would be to inflict beatings and varying degrees of injury. Beatings would be at least two blows to the victim. Gaskarov never struck anyone. His having grabbed the shoulder of a soldier and the leg of a police officer should not qualify as violence.

Concluding their speeches, the lawyers pointed out that the investigation had been completed, the witnesses questioned, and that now the materials were to be studied. Since Gaskarov was therefore no longer in a position to influence the course of the investigation or put pressure on witnesses, they asked for the conditions of his restraint to be changed.

However, judge Mushnikova did not heed their arguments, and the term of detention was extended until April 28th, 2014. By then, Alexey will have spent exactly a year behind bars.

04.02.14

[gaskarov-en]

Alexey Gaskarov calls for participation in January 19th antifascist actions

[gaskarov-en]

‘Promiscuous’ encounters

Alexey Gaskarov’s new article reveals the reasons why there were no mass riots on May 6, 2012, what kind of negotiations the opposition held with the political strategist Targamadze and what kind of the bill of authorities’ amnesty one should expect.

Lebedev and his friends from Georgia

We should not be surprised by the fact that of 100 000 protesters still there were a few who decided either to make some money by the protest or just to go over to the opposite side for an evident provocation. I know nothing that could discredit the Russian opposition more than asking money from the head of the Georgian defense and security parliamentary committee. It should not be also excluded that Lebedev is a sheer idiot.

In any case, law-enforcement bodies before May 6 already had the information about close contacts of some protesters with the Georgian political elites concerning the sponsorship of the political activity in Russia. It is quite evident that Givi Targamadze gave Lebedev money not to establish democracy in Russia but he was just pursuing his own goals. Although, the main problem is that Lebedev was ‘nobody’. Certainly, he pretended to be an important person but nobody knew him before the release of the film ‘The anatomy of protest’. And it’s just the same reason why he was of no interest to our security agents. Let there be a non-important person who tries to get money from Georgians but that doesn’t make any great story anyway. Actually all the participants of the game had to get a person of real political importance involved. And the man turned to be Udaltsov.

It is not clear yet why he decided to establish contact with those people, however, it’s rather clear that the importance of this case has suddenly raised high. At the same time, the tap-recordings don’t reveal any discussions of the actions that could be interpreted as mass riots to take place before May, 06. The talks were held actually over Russian political situation. The ‘plotters’ arrived at the following conclusion: when authorities ignore rallies it means that the situation should be ‘escalated’ by unofficial protest actions. That is to say, Udaltsov talked in his traditional manner – I think everybody remembers his words – something like “Comrades, let’s not disperse after the rally” (when everybody goes home but Sergey Udaltsov is being arrested).

However, all these talks (though unpatriotic) don’t come within any article of the Criminal Code. That’s why the security forces were just waiting for every opportune moment when the information could be used more effectively. And May 6, 2012 happened to be such a moment.

Why such a brutal break-up?

The decision to bring together riot police from the suburbs and to change the adopted plan of the meeting was based mostly on expectations that the scenario of the Pushkin square rally of March 5 (that traditional ‘don’t disperse after the meeting’) would be repeated. That’s why the park was blocked and other obstacles established so that to prevent a normal rally. The inauguration, of course, also played its role – it has created for law-enforcement bodies a kind of scheme according to which May, 06 was the last chance for the opposition to change something. We should also remember about the planned protest on ‘Manezhnaya’ square on that day with its participants too active on the Internet calling for ‘the march to the Kremlin’. That’s why we shouldn’t be surprised by the fact that at the very beginning of the sitting strike the authorities ordered: ‘Get’em’! Generally speaking, I noticed that the higher a man stands in hierarchy – the closer one is to decision-making – the more irrationally one thinks. Perhaps, they really thought that somebody would march to the Kremlin.

Why Article 212?

This is probably clear to everyone that on May, 06 there were no mass riots. The fact comes from the resolution about bringing all of us to account as accused according to Article 8 of the Criminal Code i.e. any action can be deemed criminal if it is fully consistent with “all the elements” of a crime, as described in the respective article in the Code. It means that we are being charged over some other disorders but not the disorders characterized in Article 212. In some cases it would be possible to lay charge according to Article 213 (‘hooliganism’) because it mentions the exact items that can be used as a weapon (e.g. stones) and resistance to police on duty. The heads of police also used the term ‘hooliganism’ referring to the May, 6 actions.

However, the problem is that hooliganism cannot be either planned in advance or organized. It is a spontaneous and unmotivated action by definition. This article mentions nothing about organizers, thus, the history with Lebedev and Georgians turns to get completely dissolved. They pondered a bit upon the case and decided to lay charge for ‘mass riots’.

At the same time they didn’t detain the ‘organizers’. It is evident that they just decided to wait till ‘the revolutionaries’ could talk much enough for one more article of the Criminal Code. Time went by. Udaltsov and Razvozzhaev visited Minsk meanwhile. They talked a lot of nonsense about mythical members of the Russian National Unity storming the Kremlin, about camps of opposition and other rubbish like that. Thus, the puzzle was finally solved. But there is an important aspect ��� it doesn’t result from the case papers that all of those strange people had been in fact planning riots in ‘Bolotnaya’ square. Moreover, the tap-recordings indicate that there was really nothing like that. Udaltsov for instance says that he actually didn’t support sitting strike in the first place.

But in the ‘horror movies’ produced by Mamontov for NTV (‘The anatomy of protest’) all the facts are intentionally presented to telezombies as if the meeting with Targamadze took place before May, 06 and they were the people who organized everything.

It is most likely that Lebedev confessed that it was he who organized the ‘Bolotnaya’ riots because it was a mandatory condition of the plea deal. There is no other evidence except testimonies in the materials of the case.

Why the amnesty is possible

Based on political reasons, any articles of the criminal code could be incriminated. However, for those who can read, see and hear it is quite evident that ‘Bolotnaya’ prisoners are just the same ‘participants in mass riots’ as Greenpeace members are pirates.

If their (authorities’) aim was to frighten the opposition – they can register their success. Anyway, Navalny promised not to burn torches for the time being. However, seriously speaking, such cases (and even the authorities seem to understand it) only increase the number of the opposition supporters. Thus, the amnesty is rather a rational choice for them, let alone the fact that it is not clear yet how to finish technically all the legal proceedings with such a great number of the ‘complainants’ and eye-witnesses.

[gaskarov-en]

The indictment of Alexei Gaskarov is announced

For the “trial of the twelve” the stage for the prosecution evidence to be presented has come to its end.Starting from December, 02 evidence from the defence will be adduced. Meanwhile the investigation involving all other Bolotnaya case defendants comes to a close with the indictment of Alexei Gaskarov announced.

"Gaskarov has been charged with violating Article 212, as a participant in mass riots, and Article 318 - he is alleged to have used violence against police officers. There appear to be two complainants: one was grabbed by his shoulder by Gaskarov and the other one was pulled by his leg by Alexei and dragged away from one of the arrestees. The investigation acted here much more wisely than in the case of the "trial of the twelve" defendants.

The indictment with respect to the violation of Article 212 now includes all episodes attended by use of violence against police officers, use of flares, overturning public toilet cabins. Hence it includes all actions that the "trial of the twelve" defendants are charged with, that serve to prove that mass riots have taken place. If earlier one and the same episode could have been classified under 2 articles at the same time, which contravenes the law by itself, now articles and actions are kept separated. Now the indictment turns out not that stupid and unproven as with the "case of the twelve".

As part of preliminary investigation we gave evidence after charges were announced. We proved that Alexei didn't take part in mass riots while he was in a different place at the time the breakthrough happened and had no idea that the clashes with the police and arrests were taking place by the "Udarnik" movie theater. He found himself in the thick of the action after the arrests started and he didn't understand why it was happening. He saw neither flares burning, nor clashes while he was not there when the conflict emerged. Therefore any charges under article 212 are absolutely groundless.

Several video footages have been filed by the investigation as evidence for violation of Article 318. The first one features Alexei grabbing a military man wearing police uniform by his shoulder. That episode happened during the crowd jam by the police cordon on the way to the stage. Lesha doesn't even remember this episode because there was no attack on the law enforcement officers taking place. The second episode involves the complainant Ibatullin. But the investigation has taken a misstep here while Ibatullin gets beaten up in a different place. I guess they haven't watched the video carefully enough to see Lesha drag Ibatullin away with the latter to continue fulfilling his duties afterwards. He suffers physical injury while running in an attempt to seize and arrest someone else. It is clear that Lesha has nothing to do with it. Now it is to be determined whether the investigation grants our motion to carry out the defence witnesses interrogation. The investigator became very interested in the fact that Ibatullin got injured during the different episode.

Our witnesses interrogation should make things clear."

[gaskarov-en]

Moscow City Court ruling: no changes. Impressions of the viewer

But even a moment of hope that aroused, as it seemed, just as a result of a markedly genteel tone of the judge, unlike that of the spectacle of the hearing in Basmanny Court, brought Alexei’s friends and relatives who were in the Court hall and Alexei himself on the other side of the screen even more closer together. Or was it just me who still hoped?

When going away from the court we were joking whether the recent 40 minutes of the hearing and the predictable decision were worth of several hours of waiting, which dragged on endlessly forever? Of course they were! We waved our hands to Lesha and passed positive impulse from everyone who were not present over to him.  We would be sorry if we hadn’t come.

[gaskarov-en]

Solidarity from the Swedish Capital

The solidarity action in Stockholm was organized by Russian political emigrants and also left and human rights organizations activists with 15 people taking part in it.  Alexei Sakhnin, The Left Front coordinator, told everyone present about what happened on May, 06 2012 and also about the sweeping crackdown on the democratic movement activists launched by the Russian authorities. But the most important, according to Sakhnin, is the fact that during the last 1,5 years the crackdown has been the key to political dominance in Russia, with the most powerful bureaucrats building their careers out of it.

Evgeny Volinski, a member of a Swedish rock band Bolshevikingi, pointed out that a new stage in the history of a crackdown since May, 06 had already affected dozens of artists, intellectuals and activists in Russia. The authorities shut down exhibitions, exercise heavy media censorship and throw opposition activists in prison.

The activists taking part in the action were holding portraits of May, 06 prisoners – Sergey Udaltsov, Alexei Gaskarov, Vladimir Akimenkov, Mikhail Kosenko and others. They were spreading leaflets, covering the situation with the crackdown in Russia, to passers-by. Letters with the demand for immediate release of political prisoners were handed over to the Russian Embassy representatives and journalists of the Swedish top newspapers.

The action serves to show solidarity of social activists from around the world with their Russian comrades who bravely struggle against dictatorship.

[gaskarov-en]

“One Must Serve the Motherland, I Say!”: Court Extends Alexei Gaskarov’s Arrest in Bolotnaya Square Case

“One Must Serve the Motherland, I Say!” Basmanny District Court Extends the Arrest of Bolotnaya Case Suspect and Anti-Fascist Alexei Gaskarov October 3, 2013 Yegor Skovoroda Russkaya Planeta

Alexei Gaskarov in court, June 26, 2013. Photo: Ilya Pitalyov / RIA Novosti

 On Tuesday, October 1, Moscow’s Basmanny District Court extended until February 6, 2014, the arrest of Alexei Gaskarov, whom police investigators suspect of involvement in the “mass riots” on Bolotnaya Square on May 6, 2012. Gaskarov has been charged with violating Article 212, Section 2 (participation in mass riots) and Article 318, Section 1 (use of violence against authorities) of the Russian Federal Criminal Code.

Another defendant, pensioner Elena Kokhtareva, has been released under her own recognizance. The case of Udaltsov and Razvozzhayev, whom investigators have accused of organizing the “mass riots” (a violation of Article 212, Section 1 of the Criminal Code), has been separated from that of the other defendants.

Investigator Alexei Chistyakov asked the Basmanny District Court to extend Gaskarov’s arrest for another four months, as the investigators have established that Gaskarov “used violence” against Igor Ibatulin, an officer with the Second Tactical Regiment of the Moscow Police, and a soldier by the name of Bulychev.

“In defiance of society’s moral norms, Gaskarov committed the crime in the presence of a significant number of people, taking advantage of numerical and physical superiority, and showing a clear disregard for the authorities. Moreover, his role in this case was particularly active and most aggressive,” Chistyakov read aloud to the court.

According to Chistyakov, Gaskarov presented a flight risk, since before his arrest “he did not live at his registered domicile, led a secretive lifestyle, spent the night at different locations and used various conspiratorial techniques.” Gaskarov should, therefore, be kept in a pre-trial detention facility.

During the hearing, Svetlana Sidorkina, Gaskarov’s lawyer, asked the court to enter character references submitted by the newspaper Zhukovskie Vesti and the Zhukovsky People’s Council into the record, as well as screenshots of a video recording from the case file. These stills show a police officer kicking Gaskarov in the face as Gaskarov lies on the ground.

Chistyakov and the prosecutor, Karasev, did not object to the character references being entered into the record, but they strongly objected to the shot breakdown of the video.

“The actions of law enforcement officers are not at issue in this hearing,” said Chistyakov.

Judge Artur Karpov, a man with a bald skull, agreed with their arguments and refused to enter the images into the record.

“And why is that you were found only partly fit for military service?” Judge Karpov asked, suddenly digressing from the tedious review of the case file.

“For medical reasons, but I can’t remember what exactly,” Gaskarov replied.

“How is it you don’t remember? Everyone remembers the reason they didn’t go into the army, but you don’t?”

“It was ten years ago. It had something to do with my eyesight, with intracranial pressure and something else. But now I just—“

“You just got over all those things? When did that happen? Before you turned twenty-eight?”*

“I wasn’t keeping track.”

“You weren’t keeping track. . . You should have served the Motherland,” the judge muttered.

“I wouldn’t object to serving in the army in exchange for being released from jail,” the defendant laughed.

“In exchange for working as a journalist?” After reading the character reference from theZhukovskie Vesti newspaper, Judge Karpov had for some reason decided that Gaskarov works there. “One needs to serve in the army. Anyone can be a journalist, but probably not just everyone can serve the Motherland. Why this ‘in exchange for’ right off the bat? One must serve the Motherland, I say!”

Judge Karpov was unrelenting.

“Down in Dagestan, there is a waiting list to get into the army. Being a journalist is easy. You get up when you like, go to sleep when you like, go to work when you like.”

After this emotional outburst, lawyer Svetlana Sidorkina moved that the court change Gaskarov’s measure of restraint to one not involving deprivation of liberty—to house arrest or release on bail.

“Yes, I think this would be possible,” Gaskarov replied, smiling, to the judge’s question about what he thought about the motion.

Karasev and Chistyakov categorically stated that only if Gaskarov were in a pre-trial detention facility could the investigation proceed unhindered. Judge Karpov agreed with the prosecution on this point as well and, after a recess, ordered Gaskarov’s arrest extended until February 6.

When Gaskarov spoke to the court arguing against his arrest, Chistyakov sat motionless, his hands folded in front of him, like a sphinx.

_____

Alexei Gaskarov’s argument in the Basmanny District Court:

I do not agree with the extension of my arrest and wanted to draw attention to the following things. First, I am being charged with violating Articles 212 and 318. Article 318 belongs to the category of moderately severe crimes for which the period of pre-trial detention may not exceed six months. Article 212, which criminalizes “involvement in mass riots,” stipulates more stringent sanctions, up to a year in pre-trial detention. I have a copy of my indictment, dated April 28. As of today, there has been no other indictment. According to this indictment, all the [criminal] actions that the investigator has just listed were then deemed violations of Article 318 by him.

Since the extension the investigator is now requesting means that I will have spent nine months in detention, that is, more than the statutory period of six months, I do not agree with this extension.

With regard to Article 212, I would like to return to the question of the grounds for charging me with violating it. Because even if you go by my indictment in the case file, it turns out I am accused of participation in mass riots. However, if you look at Article 212 itself, it covers mass riots “attended by violence, pogroms, arson, the destruction of property, the use of firearms, explosives, or explosive devices, and also armed resistance to government representatives.”

There is also Article 8 of the Criminal Code, which clearly states that a deed can be deemed criminal if it is fully consistent with “all the elements” of a crime, as described in one or another article in the Code. Accordingly, not all the elements of the crime, as indicated in Article 212, are included in my indictment. The article does not say that only one element or half the elements are enough. “All the elements” must be present.

Furthermore, the investigation finds that there was violence, arsons, and pogroms there [on Bolotnaya Square on May 6, 2012], but I have not been charged with arson and pogroms. I have been charged only with violence against police officers. But Article 318 already covers these actions, and it is unclear how one and the same action can be deemed to constitute now one crime, now another.

On the other hand, if you look at the article dealing with mass riots, it does indeed say that resisting police officers is a constituent element of the crime, but there it stipulates that this must be armed resistance. But there is nothing in the charges brought against me indicating that I used a weapon or objects that could be used as a weapon.

I ask the court to take note of this indictment, because it serves as the grounds for the decision to extend or change the measures of restraint.

There are different sorts of evidence in the indictment and the criminal case file, but they only touch on Article 318, not Article 212. There is no clear indication there which of my actions could be deemed a violation of Article 212.

Moreover, why did we want to enter these photographs [of Gaskarov being beaten by riot police on May 6, 2012 — Russkaya Planeta] into the record? They simply indicate that the situation was quite complicated. The way the indictment is worded implies that if you see a uniformed police officer, he is absolutely within the law and cannot do anything illegal. By entering these photographs into the record, we want to show that the situation was complicated.

As for the actions committed there, I don’t even deny that I pulled one officer by the leg, and another by the arm. But only Article 318 covers all these actions. And so I ask the court not to extend [my arrest] for more than six months.

That is all I have to say.

* In Russia, men are liable for military service between the ages of eighteen and twenty-seven —Translator.

http://therussianreader.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/gaskarov-arrest-extended/

[gaskarov-en]

Relatives of the Bolotnaya Square Prisoners Write to Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin

May 6 Committee

October 1, 2013

Dear Sergey Semyonovich:

We are friends and relatives of the defendants in the so-called case of the riots of May 6, 2012, currently being tried in the capital’s Zamoskvoretsky District Court.

Nearly all of us are Muscovites, and many of us received a personally addressed election campaign letter from you containing many warm words. “Moscow is the city to which you’ve given your strength, talent and soul,” you wrote. And it is true: we have years of work on behalf of our city’s and our country’s welfare, safety and defense under our belts.

It has become apparent to us during the court hearings that the main cause of the events of May 6, 2012, on Bolotnaya Square was the Moscow police’s sudden alteration of the arrangements [for the planned opposition march and rally], which had earlier been approved at a meeting with the Moscow Department of Regional Security. This change provoked confusion among the crowd and led to riot police pushing people back, thus exacerbating an already unbearable crush. Police brutally beat protesters in an attempt to clear the streets. But no criminal proceedings were instituted in connection with these incidents. Our relatives ended up in police custody instead of the real culprits of the clash. The trial against most of them began in June 2013 and is likely to take a very long time.

On trial days, our relatives get up early (at five or six in the morning), return to their cells late (around midnight or later), spend long hours waiting in a cramped holding cell, eat poorly soluble dry rations for lunch and endure lengthy court proceedings. These conditions would cause even healthy people to experience a significant deterioration of health. Among the defendants, however, is the Class 2 disabled person Mikhail Kosenko (whose mother recently died, although he was not informed about her illness or death, and was not released to attend her funeral) and Vladimir Akimenkov, who is threatened with blindness.

Sergey Semyonovich, we hope that we, Muscovites, are not a faceless mass to you, but individuals with their own lives and needs. And we want an answer: why, for over a year, have our relatives suffered without any proof of their guilt, while police officers who beat people are at large and serving as complainants in the case, although they often do not remember the accused and have no relation to them? Some of these police officers had a finger cut by persons unknown, making them “experience severe physical suffering,” while others had their clothes pulled or were bruised.

There were no riots—meaning massive destruction, arson and use of weapons—on Bolotnaya Square on May 6, 2012. The matter could simply be put to a rest right there, but the “riots” are, in fact, the cause of the whole trial. It is clear that the level of such legal proceedings does not stand up to scrutiny.

In your letter, you invited us to vote in the [mayoral] election, implying, of course, that it should be an honest election. It was fair elections that our children, brothers and husbands demanded: that is why they are in custody, and why they face hefty prison sentences. Judging by your letter, you want to make our city a better place, and Muscovites happier. But what can be said if here, in Moscow, in plain view, innocent people—young people, academics, and journalists—are on trial, if the country’s future is on trial?

If you are really worried about Moscow’s image, then you will certainly pay attention to the ugly spectacle being played out in the Moscow City Court, which is a disgrace to the city and the country. We appeal to you to come to the trial, which convenes every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday in the Appeals Wing of the Moscow City Court, Room 635. (As of October 1, the trial will be held at the Nikulinsky District Court, Room 303 – Editors.) You yourself will be convinced that the judge is working with the prosecution, that the evidence presented by the prosecution does not withstand scrutiny, and that the prosecution witnesses—police officers—are forced to lie under oath. Come and see for yourself that the presumption of innocence does not apply at this trial and that to impartial observers the court looks like a total circus. Or rather, it would look that way to us if our children were not behind the glass cage in this court.

We ask you to get to the bottom of this “court case” and help to ensure that in the future not a single Muscovite or visitor to the capital will be beaten with police batons at a peaceful, sanctioned rally, charged with “rioting” and thrown into prison.

We ask you, Sergey Semyonovich, to do everything to save our relatives.

We look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Natalya Kavkazkaya (mother of Nikolai Kavkazsky) Yuri Kavkazsky (father of Nikolai Kavkazsky) Viktor Savelov (father of Artyom Savelov) Alexei Polikhovich (father of Alexei Polikhovich) Tamara Likhanova (wife of Yaroslav Belousov) Stella Anton (mother of Denis Lutskevich) Artyom Naumov (husband of Alexandra Dukhanina-Naumova) Ekaterina Tarasova (mother-in-law of Leonid Kovyazin) Vasily Kovyazin (brother of Leonid Kovyazin) Olga Ignatovich (mother of Ilya Gushchin) Ksenia Kosenko (sister of Mikhail Kosenko) Maria Baronova (defendant) Tatyana Barabanova (mother of Andrei Barabanov) Alexandra Kunko (fiancée of Stepan Zimin)

http://therussianreader.wordpress.com/2013/10/02/bolotnaya-square-letter-to-moscow-mayor/

[gaskarov-en]

Stewart Home: The real reason for Alexei’s detainment is the success of the movement he belongs to

Stewart Home, an English artist, filmmaker, writer, art historian and activist posted an open letter in support of Alexei Gaskarov.

Reactionary attempts at repressing the ever-growing opposition to the Russian state are under a spotlight around the world. Most people I know have been talking about the injustices perpetrated on Pussy Riot since they were first arrested. But many other artists and activists are also a focus of discussion. Yesterday I posted information about the detention of Alexei Gaskarov on one of my Facebook pages and it attracted more immediate response than anything else I’d placed online for months.

Alexei Gaskarov isn’t a rock and roller with art world credentials to boot. He’s an anti-fascist activist and one of the faces (always unmasked) of the Russian opposition. Putin wrongly thinks he appears to be strong if he makes his opponents look weak. But when Putin’s regime detains opposition activists on trumped up charges Putin just reveals himself to be a tin-pot despot desperately clinging on to power. The anti-capitalist movement is stronger than Putin and no matter how many activists end up in jail, Putin can’t stop working class opposition growing daily more visible on the streets of Moscow and elsewhere.

State repression comes as no surprise but that doesn’t make it any easier for victims of injustice like Alexei Gaskarov. The charges against Alexei are clearly ludicrous. A prominent opposition activist is not going to lead a ‘riot’ or beat cops – apart from anything else they are too easy to identify and already a target for state repression. The real reason for Alexei’s detainment is the success of the movement he belongs to in politically opposing the capitalist class in Russia. This is not a crime in any country that claims to be democratic, which is why the judicial arm of the Russian state resorts to false charges and false allegations against Gaskarov and many others. Free Alexei Gaskarov and the 6 May prisoners now!

Stewart Home, London 14 September 2013.

[gaskarov-en]

The second complainant to appear in Gaskarov’s case

On August, 26 as part of the investigatory action a troop unit officer, who was in the military squad on Bolotnaya Square on May 06, 2012, identified Alexei as a person who committed against him the crime under Article 318 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code [use of violence against authorities]. According to this “complainant”, Alexei pulled him by the hand and dragged him out of the chain 2-3 steps forward. All the remarks questioning the fact of violence that arose during the police lineup procedure were dismissed by the investigator. Due to the complainant, he himself was shown the video footage of the Bolotnaya events by the troop unit senior officer just before he received a witness summon directing his attendance at the investigatory action procedure. So, by the very moment the complainant was to identify Gaskarov, he had already seen all the video footage.

Svetlana Sidorkina, Alexei’s attorney, is convinced that the episode in question contains no evidence of crime and the troop unit officer’s status should be changed from the one of a complainant to that of a witness.

[gaskarov-en]

A Fiancée’s Diary: “The defense’s question is disallowed since it is irrelevant to the case”

I would not be following these events so closely myself did they not concern me personally. But my fiancé, Alexei Gaskarov, is under investigation and in police custody, and I have no choice but to monitor the “Trial of the Twelve” carefully in order to gauge my chances of seeing Alexei freed as soon as possible.

All this time I have deliberately avoided going into the courtroom at the Moscow City Court where the Bolotnaya Square case is being heard, preferring to watch the live broadcast in the court hallway or observe the circus from the press balcony. If I had the chance not to go to the court hearings in Alexei’s case, I would skip those as well. It is one thing to talk with the emotional parents of the prisoners outside the courthouse and see photos of the defendants in the press, but quite another thing to see relatives and loved ones silently communicating through the glass of the “aquarium” in which the defendants are caged during the hearings, and realize they have had no other means of supporting each other for over a year now.

Yesterday, August 29, I went to the trial to keep Tanya Polikhovich company. It was the birthday of her husband, Alexei Polikhovich, one of the twelve defendants. Alexei’s dad, Alexei Polikhovich, Sr., happily greeted us in the hallway of the court.

“Alexei already celebrated his birthday with the guys in the cell as best he could. They drank soda pop from the pretrial detention facility store, and he blew out three lit matches. Why three? Because he has turned twenty-three!”

A bailiff opened the door and ushered relatives into the courtroom. Although Alexei Gaskarov is not among the first twelve defendants, Alexei Polikhovich, Sr., put his arm around my shoulders and led me to the seats near the dock. The guys in the dock pressed themselves against the glass and waved to their loved ones, smiling. Stepan Zimin was particularly glad to see his girlfriend Sasha. She had come to the trial for the first time: she was no longer considered an official witness in the case, something that had prevented her from attending the hearings. Sasha and Stepan made eye contact and kept their eyes on each other until the very end of the hearing, which would be disrupted by people in the gallery. (But more on that later.)

Yaroslav Belousov, Andrei Barabanov and Denis Lutskevich were seated in the dock closest to where I was sitting. Alexei Polikhovich sat in the farthest section of the dock. Tanya attracted his attention by waving to him. Then she unfolded a t-shirt with Dandy the Elephant emblazoned on it. Polikhovich gave a two thumbs-up sign: the t-shirt was a birthday present for him. Lutskevich kept his eyes glued on his lovely mother, Stella. Throughout the hearing they would surprise me with their amazing ability to hold a conversation merely by glancing at each other. Andrei Barabanov was looking at other people in the gallery, because his girlfriend, Katya, is unable to attend the hearings: she is an official witness in the case.

While I was examining the animated faces of the guys in the dock, Judge Natalya Nikishina entered the courtroom. As always, defendant Sergei Krivov addressed her.

“I have a motion I haven’t been allowed to enter for two days running!”

“Shut up, Krivov,” the judge cut him off.

“No, listen, you have to hear my motion!”

“I am cautioning you for causing a disruption in the courtroom, Krivov!”

“And I’m cautioning you for not hearing my motion!”

Then the testimony of the sixth “victim” in the case, riot police officer Alexander Algunov, began: the case file contains a medical certificate stating that his right hand was injured during the alleged “riots” on May 6, 2012, in Moscow, during a sanctioned opposition march. I stopped listening to Algunov’s monotonous, muddled testimony and looked back to the dock, making eye contact with Lutskevich. Denis smiled broadly, and I wrote the phrase “Gaskarov says hi!” in big, block letters in my notebook. I tried to quietly raise my postcard so the guys would see it, but the bailiffs noticed it as well. “Well, now they’ll kick me out of the courtroom,” I thought, and a bailiff, dressed in black, moved towards me. I put the notebook away and got a warning. The bailiff took up a spot next to the glass cage, blocking my view of the guys, but they leaned forward and, peering from behind him, waved at me and smiled.

While this was going on, the state prosecutor was asking to hold a police lineup right in the courtroom, despite the fact it violated court rules.

“Do you see the person or persons who assaulted police officers among those present in the dock?”

The lawyers jumped up from their seats. Defense attorneys referred to the sections of the law under which the procedure could not be carried out in court. Chin propped on her hand and smiling, Judge Nikishina slowly said, “Algunov, answer the prosecutor’s question.”

Algunov “recognized,” as he put it, “the man in the t-shirt,” nodding towards Krivov, then he also pointed out the two female defendants, Alexandra Naumova (née Dukhanina) and Maria Baronova. After which he told the court how protesters had, allegedly, shouted “Let’s go to Red Square!” and “Let’s take the Kremlin!”

As always, Makarov, who is defending Krivov, was completely prepared to cross-examine the victim, but as the hearing entered its sixth hour, people in the court gallery interrupted his cross-examination. Two young women jumped up on their seats and began singing “Bella Ciao,” the Italian Anti-Fascist Resistance song. But they did not succeed in unfurling a small banner congratulating Alexei Polikhovich on his birthday: six men in plain clothes grabbed them and removed them from the courtroom, along with everyone else in the gallery, including the relatives. Artyom Naumov, husband of Alexandra Naumova, recognized two of the men as people who had carried out a search at Alexandra’s apartment.

Everyone was now standing in the hallway, and the parents were upset. It would have been better to stage the unsuccessful performance after the hearing was over. Alexandra Naumova left the courtroom, and the judge announced a recess until next Tuesday.

Before leaving, Judge Nikishina remarked, disgruntled, that come September, hearings should be held five days a week to get this over quickly.

From left to right: Sasha (Stepan Zimin’s girlfriend), Tanya Polikhovich, Anna Karpova

[gaskarov-en]

How the world reacted to Alexei Gaskarov’s arrest. The International Solidarity Action Week results: 20 countries and 50 actions in support of the Russian political prisoner

Просмотреть Gaskarov Solidarity на карте большего размера

  We decided not to limit ourselves to just one solidarity week, the one that had originally been announced on the website gaskarov.info, but to go beyond it and provide you a summary that would cover campaigns and actions in support of Alexei Gaskarov, accused with relation to the Bolotnaya case, that took place in various cities and countries of the world over the last 3 months.

On April, 28, the day Alexei Gaskarov was arrested, up to twenty people gathered in front of the Investigative Committee building to express their solidarity with Alexei.

It was already on April, 29 that the Solidaires, a trade union from France, spoke out for Alexei and all the Russian antifascists who are in prison now denouncing the Russian authorities’ oppressive measures. The Solidaires is a French group of 57 trade unions, representing both state and private sector with more than 100 thousand members.

On May, 01 in Novosibirsk a huge banner “Gaskarov went out [of the prison] and will go out again”was part of the Monstration. This slogan speaks for itself giving a clear picture of what happened in the past and is likely to happen in the future.

On this very day in Madrid during May, 1 demo Petr Silaev, the antifascist whose name was added by the Russian police to the international wanted list, and Nucleo Terco music band members were carrying a banner demanding freedom for Alexei Gaskarov.

In Germany on May, 1 SV Babelsberg 03 fans put up a banner in support of Alexei Gaskarov during SV Babelsberg 03 v SpVgg Unterhaching match.

When it became known that Alexei had been arrested, Friday, May 3 was announced “the day of Alexei Gaskarov” and saw many supporters gather by the Zhukov monument in Moscow for one-person picketing in solidarity with Alexei.

On May, 4 the participants of the social and ecological forum in Vienna (May, 2 - 5) demanded that Alexei Gaskarov and May, 6 prisoners are released.

On May, 5 a rally in support of political prisoners in Russia took place in Paris.

On the same day in Zhukovsky, Alexei’s native city, a banner in solidarity with Alexei was put up at one of the tallest buildings of the city, opposite the “Otdykh” railway station.

On May, 6 antifascists hanged a banner in support of Alexei Gaskarov at the “Southern Bridge” in Tver.

On the same day thousands of people gathered at a rally on Bolotnaya Square where the speakers called for solidarity with Alexei and other “Bolotnaya case” prisoners. Anna Karpova, Alexei’s fiancée, made a short and persuasive speech from the stage.

On May, 7 the edition of “Zhukovskie vesti” newspaper came out with a circulation of 10.000 copies, its main topic being Alexei Gaskarov’s personality and arrest.

On May, 08 prior to the Russia-EU summit in Ekaterinburg one of the central streets of the city was renamed by the unknown from Khokhryakova Street to Alexei Gaskarov’s Street as a present to Russian president Vladimir Putin.

May, 08 was also the day when an edition of Ultra Unfug, Babelsberg fan zine, dedicated to Alexei Gaskarov, the Bolotnaya case and the repressions against russian antifascists, came out in Germany.

A bike ride in support of Alexei Gaskarov took place on May, 12 in Moscow and gathered around 100 participants.

On May, 16 the ArkaDIY Kots band played a gig at the City Museum of Vienna. The musicians announced from the stage that they were going to perform in support of Alexei Gaskarov, a new Bolotnaya case prisoner.

On May, 17 seven activists blocked traffic on Baumanskaya Street by the Investigative Committee headquarters unfolding a banner demanding freedom for Alexei Gaskarov.

On May, 18 Boris Kagarlitsky, a widely known Marxist and director of the Institute for global research and social movements, spoke on Alexei Gaskarov's arrest and the Bolotnaya case.  

On May, 19 Roman «the Surgeon» Mironenko, M-1 Selection Belarus Champion, spoke out for Alexei Gaskarov.

On May, 21 a week of International Solidarity Action (June 17-23, 2013) was announced.

On May, 24 Offside Magazine reported that antifascists, Selangor FA fans expressed their solidarity with Alexei Gaskarov.

On Monday, May, 27 a bike ride in support of Alexei Gaskarov and other May, 6 prisoners took place in Saint Petersburg. The participants rode along the central city streets setting off flares and chanting slogans «Freedom to political prisoners!», «Freedom to Alexei Gaskarov!», «Take to streets, reclaim the city!» and so on.

On May, 29 in the city of Zhukovsky a new issue of «Beetle» magazine came out with a photo of Alexei Gaskarov on the cover and the editor's introduction about Alexei.

The participants of the Alter Summit, held in Athens on June 7-8, 2013, made known their unanimous indignation with mass political repressions the Russian government has unleashed against social activists, opposing its domestic policies. “…We demand that the Russian government stop the persecution of its political opponents and social activists; we express our solidarity with the victims of the regime and wish them to preserve courage and remain staunch…”,- the appeal reads.

On June, 08 Jeff Monson, an American sportsman, anarchist and antifascist called for solidarity with Russian antifascists facing repressions from the anti-extremist police department.

On June, 9 an auction took place as part of the 8th International Open Moscow Book Festival, helping raise money for antifascists and political prisoners.

On June, 11 residents of Yaroslavl and Moscow were greeted by fresh graffiti in support of Alexei and other imprisoned antifascists.

On that very day the appeal requesting freedom for Alexei Gaskarov was signed by well-known test pilots and cosmonauts. Among people who signed the appeal to the Basmanny Court in Moscow were Igor Volk, a pilot and a cosmonaut, a hero of the Soviet Union and a member of the United Russia Party and Vladimir Kondratenko, an honoured test pilot of the Soviet Union.

On June, 12 a rally in solidarity with Russian political prisoners took place in Paris, its hallmark being the joint speech of Russian and French citizens, equally worried about the scale of political repressions in Russia.

On May, 16 a party in support of Alexei Gaskarov and Russian antifascists, hosted by the Group of resistance to political repressions and the unity of antifascists La Horde, took place in Paris.

On June, 16 in Warsaw the unknown put up a banner "Freedom to Alexei Gaskarov" to replace some street advert.

On June, 18, on Alexei Gaskarov’s birthday, Milan activists gathered in the garden named after Anna Politkovskaya which was recently opened to demand Alexei’s immediate release.

On the same day Alexei’s friends and comrades went to the detention centre “Vodnik” where Alexei remains detained to congratulate him on his birthday.

On June, 18 activists of the “Shkola Aktivista” group put several banners in support of Alexei Gaskarov and May, 6 prisoners on one of the buildings in the centre of Hamburg.

On Alexei’s birthday a series of one-person pickets was held in Tver in support of the Bolotnaya case prisoners.

And in Kolpino leaflets in support of Alexei were spread all around the city, bearing the title of the city of military glory.

In Zhukovsky Alexei’s friends presented him a special art-card on his birthday.

On June, 18 a solidarity action in support of the Russian political prisoners took place in Kiev as part of the International Solidarity Week Campaign. Among the names mentioned by the Russian Council walls were those of May, 6 prisoners, anarchists, antifascists, “Pussy Riot” collective members.

On June, 20 anarchists from Lvov held an action in support of Alexei and all the victims of political repression as part of the international solidarity week.

On June, 21 a bike ride in support of May, 6 prisoners and with a demand for Alexei Gaskarov’s immediate release took place in Saratov.

On June, 21 our comrades, antifascists from New York, held a solidarity action by the Russian embassy.

On the same day a group of solidary people went up to the House of Russian culture in Barcelona and protested against the imprisonment of Aleksei Gaskarov.

Another action in solidarity with Alexey Gaskarov took place during the “Against state oppression” festival, in Ioannina (North West Greece) on the 21st of June.

  The participants of the festival put up a banner and gave about 500 copies of a leaflet with the information about Alexey and the other “May 6” prisoners.

On June, 22 about 100 people gathered at “Gaskarov party” in the Sakharov Centre in Moscow.

On June, 22 a graffiti in support of the antifascists in prison appeared opposite one of the railway stations in Krasnodar.

 “Freedom to Alexei Gaskarov!” became the main slogan for the bike ride in support of the Russian political prisoners that took place on June, 22 in Paris.

On June, 23 anarchists from Vinnytsia, Ukraine, held an action in support of Alexei Gaskarov.

Anarchists put up a banner in one of the streets of the town of Nikolaev in solidarity with Alexei.

On June, 23 in Rostov-on-Don a group of young people pasted leaflets with information on Alexei Gaskarov’s case and on the Bolotnaya case all over the town.

During the night of June, 23 a group of supporters in Helsinki locked the car entrance of Russian embassy in Helsinki. “As long as our comrades are in captivity, the cars of Russian diplomats should stay in captivity as well” – their communiqué reads.

  On June, 23 a big antifascist rally with numerous participants, members of left-wing groups and organizations from France, Germany, Italy, Syria, UK and Russia took place in Paris.

On June, 28 petitions calling for freedom for Alexei Gaskarov and Bolotnaya case prisoners as well as demanding the authorities carry out a thorough investigation of the violent actions of the police during the peaceful rally on May, 6 were headed over to Alexander Bastrykin, the Chairman of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation and to Vladimir Lukin, the Human Rights Ombudsman, both in Russian and English.

On June, 29 an Occupy London assembly was held in London’s Hyde Park. Among the issues discussed were the police crackdown on activists, criminalization of the protest, solidarity with overseas activists who are threatened with extradition from the UK as well as Alexei Gaskarov’s and the Bolotnaya prisoners’ cases.

On July, 02 a concert in solidarity with Alexei Gaskarov took place in Munich.

On July, 03 banners in support of antifascist Alexei Gaskarov reading “Alexei Gaskarov is innocent. Gaskarov.info” appeared on 3 road bridges in Moscow.

On July, 09 members of the Teatro Valle (Rome, Italy) expressed their solidarity with Alexei Gaskarov and political prisoners of the Bolotnaya case as well as antifascists from Nizhny Novgorod. Two years ago Teatro Valle, an old Roman theater, was considered unprofitable and was occupied by the theater workers and activists. Since then it has been operating as an autonomous space for art and political discussion.

On the night of July, 28 artists from the town of Zhukovsky made up an art installation called “Stones” in support of Alexei Gaskarov. «Alexei’s positive role and his involvement in various social and cultural initiatives have always been of great benefit to informal artistic and activist practices of the people of Zhukovsky. Now we see that his activities, so valuable to all of us, have grown into him being unlawfully accused. Those are the stones for the town authorities, for all the residents of Zhukovsky who realize what is happening, and for all who are facing and experiencing lawlessness around us. It’s time “to pick up stones”, “to set the block stone free”. What we looked for originally is an artistic form that could unite Alexei’s friends, activists, anyone who is supportive of Alexei. And so we decided to suggest that anyone who’s been living next door to Alexei, went to school with him, watched the films at the film club he ran, stood side by side with him fighting for the Tsagovsky forest, worked at the Zhukovsky People’s Council in cooperation with Alexei, anyone who was on Bolotnaya square on May, 6 – all Alexei’s friends- to bring a stone to the Town hall.  There are dozens of us who strongly object to what is going on and even those, who are ready to accept the mess, performed by the state authorities on our behalf although we didn’t even vote for them.”

So, all in all about 50 actions in support of Alexei took place in more than 20 countries of the world within the last 3 months. We’re grateful to everyone who spoke out for Alexei and call for the continuing solidarity with him and the May, 6 case prisoners. Our fight for Alexei’s release continues!

[gaskarov-en]

Due to decision of Moscow City Court Alexei Gaskarov is to remain in custody

In late June, the Basmanny District Court in Moscow extended Gaskarov's term in pretrial confinement to October 6.

The defense had petitioned the court to order any other form of pretrial restraint not involving imprisonment; in particular, it had suggested placing the accused under house arrest. “The fact that Gaskarov espouses leftist views does not mean he intends to implement anarchist ideas or that he is actively involved in the antifa movement. He held a job and was involved in politics via the Opposition Coordinating Council,” Dinze said.

But the Moscow City Court did not agree with these arguments and left the Basmanny District Court's decision in effect.

Gaskarov himself participated in the hearing via video link from a pretrial detention facility.

Earlier, the police investigator had reported that several evidentiary analyses had not been completed in the case, and he likewise did not rule out new charges being filed against Gaskarov. Arguing that Gaskarov might abscond, the investigator referred to Gaskarov's involvement in the antifa movement. He also pointed out that “[Gaskarov's] acquaintances could raise large sums of money in a short time.”

In turn, the defense entered positive character references for Gaskarov and several pledges of surety, including one made by Novaya Gazeta editor-in-chief Dmitry Muratov, into the record.

According to investigators, Gaskarov allegedly “led a group of individuals” who actively participated in the riots on Bolotnaya Square in Moscow on May 6, 20132. In addition, he is alleged to have “personally used violence” against a police officer. Although Gaskarov has denied his guilt, he admits he was at the event.