Extreme Huskies - Investigative Committee vs
Altai investigators laundered a bit of the budget for the prevention of offenses removed a cartoon for the age group 14-22 years about tolerance, tolerance and all that.
The younger generation in their language is rightly advisedto follow the bazaar to feel responsibility for their words and deeds, so as not to heat the already difficult situation in the modern multipolar world.
I was interested in the topic of likes - is it really possible for a particular like to contain a crime? An administrative precedent was found - in 2012, Witold Filippov, an activist of the Tatar branch of the nationalist party Russian Union of All People, was fined 1000 rubles for likes under a screenshot from the film American History X, which depicts the hero of Edward Norton with a swastika tattoo. Moreover, the film itself is not prohibited, moreover - anti-Nazi.
This is the only Like incident found. There are already quite a lot of punishments for reposts and comments - these are known cases . Meanwhile, from a legal point of view, the composition of a repost crime is much less obvious than with a husky.
When a repost is incomprehensible, a person condemns this material, or supports it, which is important for determining intent (to incite hatred, etc.), and with a husky it is more understandable. So, ironically, simple likes are generally more “criminal” than repost.
If the likes of Filippov really displayed the picture in the VC on the wall, then technically it really was a spread of Nazi symbolism.
The same with social networks, in which the promotion of the material depends on the likes put to him. Like there bears an element of distribution and propaganda, regardless of the motive of a like person.
Experts must determine the intent in such cases under the CPC. And this is the most terrible part of the system, which is known for human rights activists, lawyers and those who have encountered this. When you bring your research, conducted by a group of certified experts with experience of 20+ years, and the investigation provides its expertise from a teacher at a local institute, and the court accepts it. There are rare exceptions, but at the level of statistical error.
Moral responsibility is being transferred - the trial to the investigation, the investigation to the expert. And no one sees the expert, and he stamps what they say. Moreover, it may well believe in what he writes. And the court "has no reason not to trust the conclusion of the expert ."
Arousing hatred of a social group is really very bad. But it is so selectively punished in this country that it is no longer just a hypocrisy - it is an effective tool for the authorities (at all levels) to solve their political, economic, social and other tasks.
Totalitarianism with a rigid dictatorship of power is not a very convenient regime in the geopolitical aspect. And the illusion of justice, with the declared opportunity to apply to the ECHR and other achievements of democracy - this can be achieved even more than a dictatorship.
The younger generation in their language is rightly advised
I was interested in the topic of likes - is it really possible for a particular like to contain a crime? An administrative precedent was found - in 2012, Witold Filippov, an activist of the Tatar branch of the nationalist party Russian Union of All People, was fined 1000 rubles for likes under a screenshot from the film American History X, which depicts the hero of Edward Norton with a swastika tattoo. Moreover, the film itself is not prohibited, moreover - anti-Nazi.
Like Story
Изначально Филиппова собирались судить по уголовной статье за экстремизм, но через два месяца переквалифицировали обвинение на административную статью 20.3 за пропаганду нацисткой символики. «Для возбуждения уголовного дела необходим состав преступления и мотив; состав нашли, а вот с мотивом получилась неувязка, поэтому остановились на пропаганде. С точки зрения прокуратуры, пропаганда выражалась в конкретном действии — нажатии кнопки. Тем самым я желал наступления негативных последствий для российского общества и культивировал вражду и ненависть. Прокуратура настаивала — если бы я этого самого разжигания не желал, то лайк бы не поставил».
К тому же Филиппов говорит, что даже не вывешивал фотографию, а просто поставил под ней лайк — в 2011 году «ВКонтакте» при нажатии лайка картинка автоматически попадала на стену пользователя в один из альбомов. Филиппов даже вызывал в суд программиста, чтобы он объяснил это суду, но суд отказался его слушать.
К тому же Филиппов говорит, что даже не вывешивал фотографию, а просто поставил под ней лайк — в 2011 году «ВКонтакте» при нажатии лайка картинка автоматически попадала на стену пользователя в один из альбомов. Филиппов даже вызывал в суд программиста, чтобы он объяснил это суду, но суд отказался его слушать.
This is the only Like incident found. There are already quite a lot of punishments for reposts and comments - these are known cases . Meanwhile, from a legal point of view, the composition of a repost crime is much less obvious than with a husky.
When a repost is incomprehensible, a person condemns this material, or supports it, which is important for determining intent (to incite hatred, etc.), and with a husky it is more understandable. So, ironically, simple likes are generally more “criminal” than repost.
If the likes of Filippov really displayed the picture in the VC on the wall, then technically it really was a spread of Nazi symbolism.
The same with social networks, in which the promotion of the material depends on the likes put to him. Like there bears an element of distribution and propaganda, regardless of the motive of a like person.
Experts must determine the intent in such cases under the CPC. And this is the most terrible part of the system, which is known for human rights activists, lawyers and those who have encountered this. When you bring your research, conducted by a group of certified experts with experience of 20+ years, and the investigation provides its expertise from a teacher at a local institute, and the court accepts it. There are rare exceptions, but at the level of statistical error.
Statistics: the average cost of investigating a single criminal case in the TFR system is about 200 thousand rubles. In the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs - about 50 thousand rubles.
Moral responsibility is being transferred - the trial to the investigation, the investigation to the expert. And no one sees the expert, and he stamps what they say. Moreover, it may well believe in what he writes. And the court "has no reason not to trust the conclusion of the expert ."
Arousing hatred of a social group is really very bad. But it is so selectively punished in this country that it is no longer just a hypocrisy - it is an effective tool for the authorities (at all levels) to solve their political, economic, social and other tasks.
Totalitarianism with a rigid dictatorship of power is not a very convenient regime in the geopolitical aspect. And the illusion of justice, with the declared opportunity to apply to the ECHR and other achievements of democracy - this can be achieved even more than a dictatorship.
A warning at the request of the site administration: “When commenting on this material, please follow the rules. Please refrain from insults and toxic behavior. The postmoderation works in the comments. ”