RUSSIA: Crackdown on “Extremism” Worries Opposition

By Kester Kenn Klomegah Reprint | | Print |

Kester Kenn Klomegah

MOSCOW, Jun 23 2006 (IPS) - For most of the past week, Russian parliamentarians have been deliberating a bill that would allow the courts to shut down political parties and organisations for slandering government officials or threatening mass protests.

The legislative assembly has said it would also consider expanding the definition of “extremist” activity in an existing anti-extremism law and to adopt stringent measures to prosecute those involved.

“By considering the bill, we would be taking radical steps in fighting against the rise of political extremism and ethnic intolerance and religious conflicts,” the State Duma’s Speaker Boris Gryzlov said.

Opposition politicians called the legislative proposal another ploy by a worried government to ensure the ruling party remains unchallenged.

Vladimir Ryzhkov, a Duma member from the Republican Party, said that the amendments “allow everyone who criticises the authorities to be declared an extremist. The appeal looks like hysteria.”

But Gryzlov said the bill – introduced by 14 deputies representing all the factions in parliament – would not punish those critical of authorities. Criticism of the authorities will not be legally defined as extremism, he explained.

“Only appeals to overthrow the authorities by force will be deemed to be unconstitutional,” he said. Gryzlov said the bill, which includes various amendments, was submitted to parliamentary factions, committees, the government and the president for a thorough review.

“Russian society is multi-ethnic and multi-religious. Therefore, manifestations of extremism and intolerance are particularly alarming and must be vigorously denounced, while those inciting extremism must be punished,” Gryzlov said.

“Undoubtedly, traditional religions play an extremely important, special role in preserving and developing the values of Russian society. Russia is a secular state, whose legislation seeks to create appropriate conditions for the exercise of the constitutional principles of freedom of conscience, including for various religious organisations,” he said.

Under the amendment, the legal definition of extremist activity would be expanded to include “statements” that extremist activity might take place, while another amendment would ban the printing and distribution of leaflets urging mass protests in the country. Large protests brought to power pro-western presidents in Georgia and Ukraine in 2003 and 2004, respectively.

The Russian Public Chamber, a year-old consultative body, praised the proposed bill and offered some suggestions. People and parties should be banned from registering for elections if they are involved in extremist activities, the chamber said in its address to both houses of the country’s parliament this week.

“Electoral legislation should provide new penalties, such as denying or canceling registration if the activities of candidates and political parties show elements of extremism. The absence of legal barriers to prevent persons and political parties that make extremist remarks from coming to power is unacceptable,” the document reads.

“Extremism is becoming an obstacle to achieving national accord, strengthening democratic values and ensuring security in Russia. We must wage a resolute struggle against it. The time has come to revise certain provisions of the law in order to bar nationalistic and extremist propaganda,” it says.

Media Soyuz, a pro-Kremlin non-governmental organisation which that monitors media performance, has also said fighting xenophobia and extremism should be the priority for state institutions and it is necessary that the State Duma provide legislative support.

“We urge the government to increase efforts to stamp out nationalistic tendencies and political tensions which pose threats to society’s stability and development. We urge media organisations to help educate the public against matters related to extremism and xenophobia,” Media Soyuz’s vice president, Yelena Zelinskaya, told IPS.

“It has become common to criticise authorities for inaction following each extremist outburst. Meanwhile, only society can uproot xenophobia,” she said.

Zelinskaya also said that “the Russian Public Chamber must take note of the fact that careless statements, and attempts to split society into ‘us’ and ‘them’ by skin colour or the place of residence invite such incidents.”

She mentioned the “Letter of the 500”, which asked the Prosecutor General’s Office last year to ban Jewish organisations. The letter, signed by 19 parliamentary deputies, was first published in January 2005. The number of signatures then increased to 500, 5,000 and finally 15,000. Signatures are still being collected on the Internet.

“The letter has not been revoked to this day, and the deputies who signed it have not denounced it. Precisely such irresponsible statements are what fuel tensions in society,” said Zelinskaya.

A prominent academician has called on lawmakers, government officials and members of the public chamber to work on the bill’s wording to set clear boundaries of what constitutes “extremism” so as not to create divisions among social and political groups.

“It’s equally important to set the limits on rhetoric or political activities, but this should not be an instrument to marginalise other social groups with good aims,” Moscow State University professor of sociolinguistics Natalya Semyonovna told IPS. She said the government would possibly find it easy to prosecute so-called extremists by using the law arbitrarily.

“Understanding language phrases and their connotations can pose difficulties to society. If the wording is left vague without adequate explanations and clear-cut analysis, political groups can be eliminated due to some misunderstanding and will have little access to legal redress. This can’t bring any balance of power when the opposition’s objective views will no longer be there,” she said.

Semyonovna made reference to research by the Institute for Complex Social Studies that analysed the factors underlying intolerance and extremism in contemporary Russia. It found that crises and conflicts in inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations are provoked not by believers but generally by marginal groups of extremist nature within a particular religion, as well as certain political forces who use religious symbols and rhetoric for their own purposes.

“These are real developments in our society and have to be controlled under the law. There is nothing wrong if the bill genuinely bans ultra-nationalist groups for remarks inciting political and ethnic hatred or are prosecuted,” she said.

Unlike most European countries, which passed anti-Nazi laws after World War II to protect ethnic minorities and keep a lid on political nationalism, Russia is just now beginning to face the problem. Nationalist sentiments have been on the rise since the Soviet collapse, with some experts saying Russian authorities made things worse during the two Chenchen campaigns with their impassioned calls for nationalism and political extremism against opposition groups.

Meanwhile, a nationwide public movement has also been set up to fight extremism and xenophobia. “Our Russia” comprises politicians, entrepreneurs, figures from the arts world and human rights activists, who will work closely with all of Russia’s religious and cultural communities.