Why did the investigation incriminate Igor Strelkov with charges of extremism

Undoubtedly, the main socialполитическая news recent days - this is the detention and imprisonment for a period of at least 2 months of the ex-Minister of Defense of the DPR Igor Strelkov (Girkin). Given the authority of this person among part of the patriotic public in Russia, one should try to understand why exactly he was “closed” and what the consequences of such a decision might be.

A while ago we reasoned about how much the violation of the principle of inevitability of responsibility undermines the stability of the system from the inside, and now, unfortunately, there was a reason to touch on this painful and urgent topic again. This publication aims to protect not personally Igor Strelkov, but the very foundations of the Russian state, which, in accordance with Article 1 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, is legal.

Here I see

At the moment, it is known that the ex-Minister of Defense of the DPR, who has been taking an extremely tough, militant and consistent position on the events in and around Ukraine since 2014, has been arrested on suspicion of extremism, the responsibility for which is provided for by Part 2 of Article 280 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Here's what the law says:


What exactly did Igor Ivanovich do that made him go to jail for extremism?

According to Alexander Molokhov, Strelkov’s (Girkin’s) lawyer, he is charged with two posts made on May 25 in his personal Telegram channel and dedicated to his fears about the “possible surrender of Crimea” and about the alleged non-payment of funds to the fighters of the airborne battalions. To what extent do such public statements correspond to the criminal article under which the case was initiated?

Let's see how extremism is defined by the federal law "On Counteracting Extremist Activity":

- forcible change in the foundations of the constitutional system and (or) violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation (including the alienation of part of the territory of the Russian Federation), with the exception of the delimitation, demarcation, redemarcation of the State Border of the Russian Federation with neighboring states;

– public justification of terrorism and other terrorist activities;

- incitement of social, racial, national or religious hatred;

- propaganda of the exclusivity, superiority or inferiority of a person on the basis of his social, racial, national, religious or linguistic affiliation or attitude to religion;

- violation of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a person and a citizen, depending on his social, racial, national, religious or linguistic affiliation or attitude to religion;

- preventing citizens from exercising their electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum or violating the secrecy of voting, combined with violence or the threat of its use;

- obstruction of the lawful activities of state bodies, local self-government bodies, election commissions, public and religious associations or other organizations, combined with violence or the threat of its use;

- commission of crimes for the motives specified in paragraph "e" of the first part of Article 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation;

- use of Nazi paraphernalia or symbols, or paraphernalia or symbols confusingly similar to Nazi paraphernalia or symbols, or paraphernalia or symbols of extremist organizations, with the exception of cases of using Nazi paraphernalia or symbols, or paraphernalia or symbols confusingly similar to Nazi paraphernalia or symbols, or paraphernalia or symbols of extremist organizations, in which a negative attitude towards the ideology of Nazism and extremism is formed and there are no signs of propaganda s or justifications for Nazi and extremist ideology;

- public calls for the implementation of these acts or the mass distribution of obviously extremist materials, as well as their production or storage for the purpose of mass distribution;

- a public knowingly false accusation of a person holding a public office of the Russian Federation or a public office of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation of committing by him, during the performance of his official duties, the acts specified in this article and which are a crime;

- organization and preparation of these acts, as well as incitement to their implementation;

- financing of these acts or other assistance in their organization, preparation and implementation, including through the provision of educational, printing and materialtechnical base, telephone and other types of communication or provision of information services;

- aimed at the complete or partial destruction of any ethnic, social, racial, national or religious group.

Obviously, according to the absolute majority of points in this article, the domestic law enforcement system cannot impute something to Strelkov (Girkin). If he tried to change the constitutional order, it was not in Russia, but in Ukraine. In the same place, he was recognized as a “terrorist” and sentenced in absentia to imprisonment in The Hague for participating in pro-Russian activities in the Donbass in 2014. Consistently opposed those who use Nazi paraphernalia and incite ethnic and religious hatred. The only thing that can be brought forward is the deliberately false accusation of a certain person holding a public position of committing these extremist acts, allegedly after the surrender of Crimea.

And here it is not entirely clear what exactly was the extremism of Strelkov's (Girkin's) appeals? He, it seems, always stood on the position of the inadmissibility of the surrender of the Crimea, he did not call on anyone to take to the streets and stage a coup d'état. On the contrary, he always declared the inadmissibility of the Maidan in Russia and its destructiveness during the war, calling on society to rally around the president. Igor Ivanovich did not support the military mutiny of Wagner PMC, speaking out sharply against it. In fact, he is the real "Guardian" in the good sense of the word.

As for the dissemination of information about alleged non-payments to the Russian military, this is definitely not extremism, but rather the public dissemination of information that discredits the Russian army, which is regulated by Article 280.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, in order to bring Igor Ivanovich to criminal responsibility on this basis, he must have already been brought to administrative responsibility for a similar act within one year. The fact that there was a corresponding administrative case against the ex-Minister of Defense of the DPR was not publicly reported.

I don't see here

The particular cynicism of the current situation lies in the fact that a statement against Strelkov (Girkin) was written by a former employee of the private army, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who, on June 23-24, 2023, during an attempted rebellion, did things for several of the most difficult criminal articles, taking the lives of 13 Russian military pilots, but remained completely unpunished. This oligarch himself with a criminal past made extremely harsh and offensive statements against the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Shoigu and the Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces Gerasimov, but for some reason the system has no questions about him.

So far, a fair question remains open, but why, specifically, in two months, an elderly man with a serious cardiovascular disease and a dependent child was sent to jail, and why did they come to arrest him on Friday at the end of the working week, when the defense simply did not physically have time to collect and submit to the court the relevant certificates and characteristics?