Kremlin urges Majlis to Strasbourg

Russia’s Supreme Court on September 29 adopted a decision confirming the prohibition of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, which the Supreme Court annexed Crimea acknowledged extremist organization.

As a basis for barring the public prosecution is considering several factors, among which – the incident in the area of ​​cross-border Armjansk May 3, 2014. Then, during a meeting of Crimean Tatars with the national leader Mustafa Dzhemilev clashed with Russian security forces. As a result, two criminal cases were initiated. According to charge, resistance to the border guard and the riot police, who arrived in the Armenian, was organized by the Majlis.

Lawyer Marina Agaltsova representing the interests of the Mejlis of the Supreme Court of Russia, in response, said that apart from the Crimean Tatars in the Armenian regions were 200 employees “Berkut”, two tanks and two armored personnel carriers. She confirmed that there are two sentences of violence against the police and obstructing their work – one held by the collar, the other dealt a few blows – but signs of extremism in this.

Also attracted the attention of law enforcement statements of the leader of the Mejlis Refat Chubarov in the media. “For us, the war will end only when the Crimea will return to Ukraine should prepare for war with Russia, I am one of those who are calling and preparing for the worst -.. A full-scale war with Russia,” – quoted the leader of the Majlis prosecutor Vladimir Chuhrin.

Agaltsova, commenting on the prosecution’s argument, stressed that Chubarov says that war is about the events of the future, and does not call to take up arms. The lawyer said that it is a personal position of a public figure, and Majlis due to it not to adopt any resolution.

In addition, the state prosecution considered that the Majlis involved in the organization of transport, and after the termination of electricity supply from mainland Ukraine – and energy blockade of the peninsula.

protection representative confirmed that the blockade took place, but was not discriminatory activity, although the court calls the Crimean residents’ social group whose rights are violated. ” “So it is possible to produce a maniac, a tool in the same area, he does not kill another, and thus discriminates against its citizens”, – said Agaltsova.

At the end of his speech, the lawyer called the ban the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people interference with freedom of speech and assembly.

At the end of April 2016 the Russian authorities have banned the activities of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people on the territory of Russia annexed the peninsula, accusing the organization of extremism. US, EU, Ukraine and Turkey condemned the ban.

Astrakhan court again denied parole Hayseru Dzhemilev – the son of the leader of the banned in Russia Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people. This was reported in his twitter lawyer Nikolay Polozov.

He also told Radio Liberty that for all the time spent in prison Cemil spent more than 210 days under various penalties. The lawyer said that they submitted without reason, and with their help to the convict and his father Mustafu Dzhemileva pressured.

In June 2015 the first Krasnodar Regional Court sentenced Haysera Dzhemileva to five years in prison for murder. According to investigators, in May 2013 in the courtyard of the house in Bakhchisaray Cemil he shot from a gun person. Self deprecating insists that he committed manslaughter, because they do not know what a gun is not removed from the fuse.

Dzhemilev has repeatedly denied parole.

Kremlin pressure on the Majlis and its leaders are discussing journalists Roman Tsimbalyuk , Eider Muzhdabaev lawyer Nikolai Polozov , human rights activist and member of the Human Rights Council under the President of Russian Federation, expert of the Moscow Helsinki Group Andrey Yurov .

Moderator – Vladimir Kara – Murza, a senior .

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: On the eve of Russia’s Supreme Court took a decision confirming the prohibition of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, which the Supreme Court annexed Crimea acknowledged extremist organization.

Today, the fate of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people we talk with our guests. We have a studio – Roman Tsimbalyuk, chief correspondent of the news agency “UNIAN” in Russia.

Roman, I know what you were yesterday at the trial. It looked like the infamous triumph of domestic Themis?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: I’ll start with the fact that the Supreme Court of Russia at the statue of Themis is not blindfolded. And I said to the lawyers, the case of “extremism” that got there for consideration, stamped, and has never been the case that they have been reviewed. That is all well aware of how it all will end.

But personally, I was most impressed by this story speech of the prosecutor, who bluntly said that the problems in the Majlis because Crimean Tatars do not recognize the occupation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. And this is the main requirement. And what of the Crimean Tatars are not only accused, ranging from the organization of the rally near the Supreme Council of Crimea, where, in my opinion, even in Moscow has not yet been taken on the annexation decision. They were accused of carrying out the action on the anniversary of the deportation. It is clear that the Russian began to apply the law, and are not accustomed to, that people can go to any shares, and would like to Crimean Tatars go systems.

But the problems of the Crimean Tatars in the Russian Federation began March 12, 2014, when Mustafa Dzhemilev, the leader of the Crimean Tatars, came to Moscow and held a telephone conversation with Putin. Cemil was in Tatarstan representative office in Moscow. That is, they have not met, but talked on the phone. Then the president of Russia tried to win over the Crimean Tatars. And later said Mustafa-aga: “He tried to recruit me.” I understand that the main purpose Cemil was that there was no bloodshed. But the events that began after, say, that the Crimea – is the beginning of the genocide.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And now we have to regard Andrei Yurov, a member of the Human Rights Council under the President of Russia, expert of the Moscow Helsinki Group.

Andrei Y. whether the new Crimean authorities do (or occupation authorities, according to Ukraine) intuitively felt disloyal Crimean Tatars and their organizations?

Andrey Yurov:Perhaps they felt disloyal. The question is that, in my opinion, even in the first year, so to say, the change of regime in the Crimea had the opportunity to loyalty was quite peaceful and legitimate. Because all the Crimean Tatars, if you look at the entire history of the struggle for the rights of his people, always just different examples of clear and pure non-violence and respect for human. From my point of view, it was impossible to imagine the Crimean Tatars as a cheering and applauding participants Crimean average community. But, at least, all of this could be a completely different way, not as part of the confrontation, the confrontation, the more the terrible things that happened over the last two years. I have in mind the disappearance, searches, arrests, many political prisoners, and so on.

It seems to me that if the new Crimean authorities remained within at least minimal respect for human rights, the situation might be different. That is, could be at least some dialogue, well, even with the unfair part of society, and that’s fine, no one is obliged to be loyal, but at the very least, could be more or less constructive dialogue to ensure that the situation was not tragic. But now the situation is, in my view, it is tragic, since a large part of the people perceive the current repressive Crimean authorities who are doing lawlessness, in which it is impossible to obtain protection in the event of infringement. In addition, the power that is itself continually creates arbitrary and violates the law. Here it is the key to what is now, in my view, it takes place in the Crimea against Crimean Tatar society.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And how offensive sounded the reason for deportation? Allegedly the whole Crimean Tatar people collaborated with the Nazi occupiers. How it looks believable even for wartime?

Andrey Yurov: I’m not a historian, and it is very difficult to judge all the endless deportations. I think it still has not put in this sense point, well, not in relation to the Crimean Tatars, and against all other nations. I know it’s late, but to be held court over the Stalinist regime, and almost all the repression of many peoples should be recognized, at least, a crime against humanity. And maybe, in some cases – and genocide.

And in this sense, of course, any collective punishment is a heinous crime, even if all of a sudden some Crimean Tatars participated in any conciliatory things with the Nazis … And we know how many hundreds of thousands or millions of Russian participated in various armies Vlasova, etc. . Then you need to punish the entire Russian people as a whole. I think that as a percentage of the Crimean Tatars of collaboration with the occupiers was no more. Well, it’s just a crime against humanity – that the deportation and she only and can be evaluated.

Any collective punishment – is a crime against humanity. But everything else – whether individual Crimean Tatars were guilty or not – a separate conversation, which seems to me to lie in a completely different plane. If someone something was alone to blame, well, then separate the one who is guilty, punished. But certainly it should not be punished by the people, especially – women, the elderly, children and so on. Well, it’s a thing that can be treated or genocide, or at least as a mass crime against humanity under international humanitarian law.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Is it possible to say that the way is now open to appeal in Strasbourg, the plaintiffs in this lawsuit?

Роман Цимбалюк: Теоретически с законодательной точки зрения это правда. И адвокаты вчера на суде говорили об этом, и сейчас Чубаров об этом сказал. Но проблема в том, что отношение России к международному праву очень избирательное. И я боюсь, что несмотря на то, какое будет решение, это мало изменит ситуацию на месте. И самое главное, в Страсбурге дела рассматриваются годами. А жизнь идет сейчас. Если в Меджлисе крымско-татарского народа 33 человека, то местный Меджлис – это 3, 5 тысячи человек. И получается, что фактически под угрозой вся элита крымско-татарского народа. И на сегодняшний день, к сожалению, я не вижу, чтобы кто-то мог их защитить.

A recent example – the investigation by Boeing. Everyone says that it has made the Russian state. And here they say: “We do not know anything.” And I’m afraid that will be exactly the same position on the Crimea. In case of continued repression. They will be invited to what some corrupt Europeans, who will say: “It’s all good fun We’re conducting national holidays.”. And this will create a picture, without going into details, but the reality is silent.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And if plaintiffs are now served in the Strasbourg court, would this mean that the Crimean Tatar Mejlis recognize the jurisdiction of Russia? Because no matter how on the Russian Constitution, according to Russian standards, they would be fed to the Strasbourg Court. Here arises a specific moral choices?

Andrey Yurov: From my point of view, no. Submission of the Strasbourg court is the next thing that people recognize that this area is under the jurisdiction of the Council of Europe, under the jurisdiction of the European Convention. Ukraine and Russia are members of the European Convention. And in this sense it does not matter against which the authorities submitted to the European Court. There is a concept relevant jurisdiction. There are some authorities who are temporarily or permanently monitor the area, and there is a recognized or internationally recognized territory from the point of view of international law. One does not cancel the other.

То есть в данном случае на этой территории нарушителем является Российская Федерация. И подача в Европейский суд против Российской Федерации совершенно не означает признания ее не только де-факто управляющей нынешними крымскими властями, но и вообще признания некоего суверенитета. Нет, это совершенно не так. И в Европейском суде есть масса дел, когда так называемой “эффективной территорией” признаются вещи, никак не связанные с прямой территорией.

For example, a military base, located in the territory of another country. Although a military base does not have any right of extraterritoriality, it’s not even an embassy. However, you can complain to the person who controls the base, rather than the State in which this military base is located. This is me talking about a specific case on the crimes of the British military base in Afghanistan. Afghanistan does not belong to the European Convention, to the European Court. But what happens at the British military base, it is subject to the decision of the European Court.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: An additional complicating factor to this whole situation is the fact that the son of the leader of the Crimean Tatar people Mustafa Dzhemileva Hayser is in a Russian prison.

We now give the floor to his lawyer Nikolai Polozov.

Nicholas, whether there signs of a political case? And if the son of Mustafy Dzhemileva peculiar hostage current Russian authorities?

Nikolai Polozov: Certainly Hayser – hostage. And when the decision to transfer him from the Crimea to the Russian Federation in Krasnodar, when the Supreme Court took a decision on this jurisdiction, I was presented to the Supreme Court decision of the European Court of Human Rights on 39-in rule, which clearly was written that Hayser must not be exported outside of the Crimea and Ukraine, and must be returned immediately back. Russian Federation, this Court’s decision ignored. Moreover, the Supreme Court judges directly wrote in his decision that this Court’s decision is only a recommendation. This is the 39th in regulation, then there is a condition when there is a threat to life.

And now continuing Haysera hold as a hostage. Sam Mustafa Dzhemilev said that at the time when he offered to cooperate with Russia, it is as one of the conditions of the proposed release of his son. On such blackmail he could not give in.

As for Haysera, he is only a little less than two months before the expiry. November 26, he must go free. But here it became known today that in mid-September, 15 th, Astrakhan court secretly ruled, that is, without an invitation lawyer is going on which in relation Haysera Dzhemileva set a three-year term of administrative supervision. It should be in the Crimea, he was forbidden to leave the house with a 10 pm to 6 am, he was forbidden to leave the Crimea, as well as twice a month, it should be celebrated in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation. Given that he is a citizen of Ukraine, and is recognized by the Russian Federation … In August, I was received by the appropriate response structure, which now performs the function of the FMS – is the General Directorate of Migration Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, and there is black and white, that he is a citizen of Ukraine. And there is the position of the Supreme Court concerning the fact that administrative supervision can not be set against the Nationals. Why? In Haysera not have Russian citizenship, no residence permit. After the liberation of the maximum legal stay on its territory of the Russian Federation will be 90 days. After that he must leave the Russian Federation. And here there is, of course, there is a minimum of legal conflict. After that he must leave the Russian Federation. And here there is, of course, there is a minimum of legal conflict. After that he must leave the Russian Federation. And here there is, of course, there is a minimum of legal conflict.

I am convinced that this decision was made only for as long as possible to hold it. And in this regard, of course, there are fears that against him can fabricate a new case is already in the colony, just prior to release – to continue to manipulate them by putting pressure on his father.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And that will have to abide by a curfew Hayser Dzhemilev – is reminiscent of the time of deportation, when all the deportees walked celebrated every evening, and so lived for 15 years, in my opinion?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: It is clear that the problem of the Russian authorities – is to hold a person. A ban on entry into the territory of the Crimea Mustafa Dzhemilev and the entire leadership of the Mejlis. Who occupied a very active position on the rejection of the annexation, they can not go there. And from an ethical point of view, I’m not talking about the legal, well, everything as in war, there other options I do not see.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Andrew, legally vulnerable, all this collision, that a foreign citizen judged, especially, will hold three years in Russia under the threat of a subscription and the curfew?

Andrey Yurov: Yes, of course, the whole structure to retain a foreign citizen legally vulnerable. But I am afraid that many political issues in Russia will not always work right, unfortunately, it runs the political field. And I have a feeling that in this case we are dealing with a man who has become a hostage for political reasons and the right may be trampled in the name here of political considerations.

But it seems to me that this is the moment when just the Court may, in a special procedure to consider this matter very quickly. And then the most important thing is not a new persecution began. It is impossible to prevent in any way. If there is political will, to a new prosecution began, most likely, it will begin.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Nicholas, you is not the first process, when your client – a citizen of Ukraine. How faithfully and scrupulously the Russian prosecution in this case prepares indictments materials? And in the case of Hope Savchenko Russia did not appear as a party to an armed conflict?

Nikolai Polozov: It is clear that such cases and those cases against foreign nationals, in this case the citizens of Ukraine who have certain political implications, they are fabricated. From beginning to end it is the fruit of the imagination of individual investigators, some officials. And it’s Hope Savchenko convex Show All charges inconsistency. Moreover, the Russian authorities showed an interest in this conflict. At least – interest. I’m not talking about the involvement in this process. Although the fact of her abduction and transportation of the Russian Federation said that the secret services, at least crossed the border.

And in the case Hayserom certainly has the same interest, the same motivation. And in my opinion, as well as in those cases, which now go to the Crimea against Crimean Tatars, of course, there is no criminal grain, grain is not legal. There is a certain political expediency, under which already adjusted the remaining legal points.

I expect that in the near future in connection with the prohibition of the Mejlis will be a new wave of criminal cases, it will be held in the Crimea, it will affect not only the Majlis members, but also, in the words of one of our politicians, who soup cooked them who brought a wood and so on. While I do not see any alternative to this kind of business, but to provide a serious foreign policy pressure on the people who make the decisions in these cases. And these people are sitting in the Kremlin.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Is it possible to everyone who has been mentioned, and a lot of your countrymen, held in Russia, considered a political prisoner?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: it’s definitely for me. If we talk about the “Crimean scenario”, who falls under the ice rink? This is primarily the citizens of Ukraine, regardless of nationality. Well, now, of course, primarily the Crimean Tatars. Those who oppose the occupation, act openly, are not shy about his opinion.

Not so long ago it was “the work of Oleg Sentsova” and three of his companions. What Ukrainian director Oleg Sentsov received 20 years in prison? For what he said, that the Crimea – it is Ukraine. There’s your answer. But this is the first step.

And with the Crimean Tatars still such an interesting pattern. Russian legislation regarding extremism has changed dramatically. And the result is a situation that investigators have instead engaged in the business – to disclose the theft and murder, they will now sit “VKontakte”, to find any post that was made prior to the annexation or after, on the basis of this publication is to fabricate a criminal case and send a person to jail, and get a medal. I do not know what to call it. This is genocide and a crime against the citizens of Ukraine.

Here the goal is achieved – everyone else who does not support it, people begin to be silent and conceal their true opinion. As a result of a referendum under 150 … Probably, very spare in Russia, which can not be more than 100 percent, but such results have been painted on psevdoreferendume March 16, 2014.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: A role played by (and I think they saved the honor of Russia) the numerous dissidents who informed to countrymen the truth about the tragedy of the Crimean Tatars? As General Grigorenko.

Andrey Yurov: I believe that it was the most wonderful people. And I would like to follow their course. Indeed, the dissidents, I think, played a huge role for the entire world and Soviet society were aware of the tragedy of the Crimean Tatar people. And of course, any action of solidarity and direct support were also very important.

It seems to me that the modern Russian society is not mobilized now, including human rights, for the protection of the Crimean Tatar people, regardless of who and what is considered the jurisdiction. I think the time has come to the Russian authorities, and it makes these actions, the Russian human rights activists, the Russian intelligentsia and Russian society in general must now take good care of this issue and to provide maximum support to the Crimean Tatar people and its leaders. And it seems to me that what is happening there, have to say a hundred times more than he is now.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Do Ukrainian society feels that some brave or maybe the organization, such as the Congress of the intelligentsia, they do not share the official ideology, are friends and allies of the Crimean Tatars and all the Ukrainian people?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: Unfortunately, against the background of what happened after the Crimea – the war in the Donbass, the average Ukrainian is not shared by the citizens of Russia into “good” and “bad.” They are all, to put it mildly, are perceived in a negative way. Even people with so-called liberal views that overlook the protests here. But many then come to Ukraine with the feeling that they owe something. Such an attitude to yourself that they must accept there as heroes, it is in Kiev, in Ukraine misunderstanding.

And who says the situation with Parliament? I have not heard a single complaint before the Russian intellectuals in defense of the Majlis. I think that almost no one knows about it. Yesterday in the courtroom had two cameras – two Ukrainian TV channel: our and our colleagues from Ukraine. It was Radio Liberty. Here, information that does not correspond to the Kremlin policy, simply do not have it for a very narrow group of people who are interested in a little more than that, and so do not agree with what is happening. And change the general opinion in the country – it is now almost impossible.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Nicholas, and whether your client feels that there are people in Russia who are sympathetic to the cause and the right of the Crimean Tatars and the Ukrainian people? As once-seven people came to Red Square against the introduction of tanks in Prague, Czechoslovakia, and residents remember their names, and makes the difference between the general mood of the authorities and the seven people who saved the honor of Russian, let’s call them so.

Nikolai Polozov: I’m afraid that at the moment, maybe even seven people does not reach.

Roman Tsimbalyuk: Since Nicholas often in Ukraine, he felt these sentiments. Unfortunately, we do not understand what really happened.

Nikolai Polozov: I think, unfortunately, it is also cultivated. For example, those people who are trying to help in the Crimea, the Crimean Tatars, they are under a certain pressure. For example, in relation to me are going to open a criminal case in the Crimea. And this is done with respect to my colleagues – the Crimean lawyers. Occur attacks on their offices, they cautioned. We are talking about the fact that the authorities in every possible way cultivates fear a ban not only on helping persecuted people there, but in general, the discussion of this topic. And I do not see how in Russia a significant interest in the problems of political prisoners associated with the Crimea, Ukraine.

Not the best situation in Ukraine. Despite the fact that the declared quite a lot of things, including the president of the Crimean Tatars, the level of support from the citizens of Ukraine is very low.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, Sr.: The Human Rights Council under the President of people like you, Andrew, with your position, how many of them? Can they be counted on the fingers of one hand?

Andrey Yurov: I think these people more than a decade, even in the Presidential Council on Human Rights.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: A felt if that Nadezhda Savchenko won the Russian court, and it had a moral superiority over his persecutors?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: It is one hundred percent. But we must pay tribute to that for the hope of the entire world stood Savchenko. That is thanks to the media, I think so, Surname Savchenko was voiced in the statements of all civilized countries. Yes, it could be exchanged. But she sat there for over a year. Well, the media may not be for every man to do such a noise. She just his daring behavior during vessels attracted attention that, in the end, helped her release. And the rest? All this is sad. With the help of diplomatic pressure, which occurs just after the resonance in the media, you can not save anyone who is not guilty, and is the most terrible.

Let’s go back to Oleg Sentsova. 20 years, he is serving his sentence. And how the “news”? You can not repeat the information about the person who is serving a sentence, even if he is not to blame, every day. That’s all.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Why not the same full support Hayseru Dzhemilev as was Nadezhda Savchenko?

Nikolai Polozov: This is a different strategy of criminal cases. In the case of Hope, we took a strategy to limit the politicization of the process. I remind you that she was elected during the detention deputy of the Verkhovna Rada, it was subsequently delegated to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. And our strategy was actually just at the limit of politicization.

Regarding the case of Haysera, in this case it did not have to politicization. Concerning it took the jury. It should be noted that the Board was assembled normal, not rigged. There is a significant difference between “Hope Savchenko business” and “business Haysera”. Nadezhda Savchenko did not commit any criminal acts attributed them to her. In the case of Hayserom actually occurred household accidents associated with the careless handling of weapons. And the sentence that he was given the Russian Federation, coincided with the verdict, which rendered Ukraine. Another question is that it is, of course, in the Russian Federation should not be judged. That is, to re-make the sentence imposed by another country, he should not have. And in this match their cases – enforcement was absolutely illegal.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And in this connection would be to put the situation before the Strasbourg Court? What is the main violation of the Convention on Human Rights in the case of Hayserom Dzhemilev?

Andrey Yurov: Home situation is connected with the fact that he is a foreigner. And foreigners have a special rule for the internationally unrecognized territories.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And now we have a direct connection to the Eider Muzhdabaev journalist, deputy director general of the Crimean Tatar channel ATR.

Eider, what will be the actions of your associates and colleagues after a replay in the Russian courts the case of reincarnation of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people? Two instances you lose – and you can go to the Strasbourg court.

Eider Muzhdabaev: Crimean Tatars and the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people have not lost anything. It can not be destroyed or Majlis, nor the people, because it’s all the same. Lost to the Russian Federation, it has lost its power once again, and this time crushing. After the ban of the Crimean Tatar self-government will be very difficult to tell the world about how well people live in the Crimea, and lie about how Russia has brought happiness there. This is an obvious act of national humiliation, demonstrative and legally recorded.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And what are the consequences of the defeat of the ATR television channel, which is used to work on the territory of Crimea, and now forced to work in exile?

Eider Muzhdabaev: The consequences are quite simple. ATR television channel moved from the Crimea to Kiev and continues to work, broadcast, communicate around the world and the truth about the Crimea, the repression that Russia is doing in the Crimea.

All they are doing in the Crimea, the boomerang returns, but with much greater force. I could say that this ill-conceived policy of Russia, it is mistaken. But I understand that the system that exists in Russia, it’s not a bug, but it is logic. That is the logical behavior of the Russian authorities in Crimea leads to such effects that a boomerang hit the reputation in Russia, and they have already beaten, and no lead nowhere good Russian. But today’s Russia and I do not want anything good.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Today was inconclusive attempt to alleviate the plight of Haysera Dzhemilev. And on what grounds it can be recognized as a political prisoner?

Eider Muzhdabaev: Any citizen of Ukraine, who was taken forcibly from the territory of Ukraine, in this case, the Crimea, the territory of the Russian Federation, it is a priori a political prisoner. Because he is in a foreign country, and he did not ask. It’s hard to talk about some kind of law. This is an absolute offense from all sides without even going into the details of the case. Case has been investigated, he was to serve his sentence under Ukrainian law, and with him the Ukrainian justice should be dealt. And as he fell into the hands of Russian justice – it’s all illegal originally. It should long ago have been released. But it is used as said Mustafa Dzhemilev, blackmail – blackmail his son. But they do not understand one thing – Mustafu Dzhemileva, who spent 12 years in Soviet prisons, nothing can not be blackmailed. That’s all.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Did a shadow on the legitimacy of the parliamentary elections in Russia casts that they were “held” in the Crimea?

Eider Muzhdabaev: It makes them illegitimate. And the actions that Russia now produces in the Crimea, aggravate an already painful effect, which produced the so-called “elections”.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Did the Kremlin worth insisting on the elections in the Crimea? Or you could somehow more elegant around this topic?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: Home ideological line – is that “our Crimea, and in no way, we do not put this into question.” And this is true not only elections. They are trying to bring this conversation: “This is ours, and we do not discuss it.” Exactly the same policy, for example, for all legal disputes, which are now beginning to be made by the Ukrainian companies, the Ukrainian state. But it is absolutely the so-called excuses at this level: “If that is ours, we are not talking about it.”

This policy is identical to that carried out in the Donbas with Boeing. We are told: “This is your anti-aircraft missile system”. It has not been proven. The same applies to the participation of the Russian military in Donbas. And Russia’s position here is identical. It turns out that “as long as we do not recognize that we have sent to Russian soldiers, then, the evidence does not exist.” I think this is a slap to the civilized world. And it will be surprising if such a boorish attitude they will be able, for example, “bend” Europe, as many are saying. Even the question of sanctions. And you want to ask our European friends: “Your word is worth something or get you there quite relaxed?”.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And as far as from a legal point of view and look illegitimate Duma elections in the Crimea, and the whole status of the Crimea?

Nikolai Polozov: If we talk about international law, we rely primarily on those resolutions, which makes the United Nations. Resolution of 27 March 2014 clearly and unambiguously defined and ownership of the Crimea and all follow-up questions.

So when we talk about the elections, especially important, not the position occupied by the Russian government, – it’s all clear, but the position is occupied by the West. Now the West takes this position: “There are six Crimean deputies, three of which are selected from party lists, three of which are selected from single member constituencies Here we do not recognize them And everything else recognize…” But unless all the parties that participated in the campaign for a single federal district that, for them not to vote in the Crimea? How to isolate the “impure” Crimean voices of votes of the parliamentary parties, which took place in the State Duma? No way! The only possibility for the parties was to preserve its purity, not to get those voices that delegitimiziruyut any result – is to withdraw from the elections. But no one appeared. Well, The Russian Federation will send a delegation to the PACE. They will choose people who are not related to the Crimea, if each party – the Crimean vote. This poses a threat to the recognition of the election. But what happens in foreign policy, much depends on how you react to the Western partners of the Russian Federation.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Andrew, how do you see a way out of this situation? Perhaps a compromise at the first stage?

Andrey Yurov: This is a subject which I least wanted to deal with, because the elections to the Human Rights have nothing to do. But everything that happened in the last election, I have a number of different causes doubt and hard feelings, I do not even know if there is some trade-offs to international organizations. I think that is just very good, if international organizations properly a headache about what to do in all this. And it seems to me that they have a little headache about what is happening in the Crimea.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Roman, you feel that weakened public opinion and pressure on the Kremlin in the Ukrainian question?

Roman Tsimbalyuk: I guess it’s natural. It is human fatigue. A person can not be in constant tension. And the number of victims and the degree of intensity of the conflict affect its interests. This is the law of journalism.

But I think that the West does not forget, and if he wants to do it, the situation that is developing in Syria, do not allow it. Because the contradictions accumulate, and with the position of the Russian leadership broneloboy … if one of the partners acts solely by force. A Ministry of Foreign Affairs and all the other bodies of the Russian Federation simply justify the actions of the Russian soldiers. So it was in the Crimea, as it was in the Donbas, as is happening in Syria. Well, how to get out of this situation? ..

But I’m surprised the two-valued position of the European partners, who at the same time say: “We do not recognize only part of the election – only in the Crimea.” And where it leads? Poklonsky that they will not let in PACE, in Strasbourg? And with all the others will conduct negotiations as if nothing is happening? I think that sooner or later the negotiators on the other side, too tight will think that it is necessary to change their approach. You can not be a little democrat. If the Western world really is a supporter of their Western values, which is very often like to tell Ukraine, it is necessary to take more decisive action.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: And what legal possibilities are in the near future? What options do the Strasbourg Court?

Nikolai Polozov: Unfortunately, in the Russian Federation to the European Court strongly cropped the latest changes in the legislation. Now the Constitutional Court has the right to choose which solutions like, what do not like. And I have the feeling that on the most pressing issues, he just will choose the most meticulously.

But there is a downside. Failure to comply with European Court judgments entails the exclusion of the Council of Europe. And it would mean actually a new round of “Cold War”. I do not think are interested in that both the Kremlin and the West. Therefore, most likely, in the event of failure to perform the most important decisions on the most sensitive issues – all this will be translated into foreign policy of legal plane. Will just sit down and agree on something, in my opinion.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Did the probability of excluding Russia from the Council of Europe?

Andrey Yurov: This is probably the most difficult question of the past few years. I think this question can be tragic for Russia and Western citizens. Because Russia, as a state, does some things that are a little compatible with the general principles of the European Convention. On the other hand, the presence in the Council of Europe, and at least some jurisdiction of the Court – it is at least some assurance, so to speak, from the lawlessness in the territory of Russia. And here at different scales, as always, are placed different weights. On the one hand, as if there are actions that are inconsistent, and it is necessary to raise the question of suspension of membership, on the other hand, suspension of membership will lead to tragedy, but not for power, but for millions of citizens. So, perhaps this kind of issues are very complicated.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Crimean Tatar people, who survived the deportation of all, it will take and the “black” strip that now he came in connection with the occupation of the Crimea Russia? Will he be able to recover its autonomy, statehood already after all this will subside?

Roman Tsimbalyuk:And it will subside when the occupation will end. And when it’s over, I’m sure no problems will not be. Events in recent years a lot by the citizens of Ukraine told about their country. Before the operation of annexation has always been a view that the Crimean Tatar factor – a “time bomb” for the Crimea as part of Ukraine. And this sentiment is strong enough cultured society. Because they thought due to the fact that this is a different culture, a multinational family, Crimean Tatars will be more – and they displace, almost, I’ll talk straight, do not cut out the Slavic population. But when something happened that had happened, it was the Crimean Tatar guys brought Ukrainian military food, have been blocked by Russian invaders. In Kiev, there was no power when held operation to capture. And no orders, and complete misunderstanding, what to do. So it was the Crimean Tatars came to the rescue. And such things are not forgotten.

Nicholas said that in Ukraine is not very good attitude to the Crimean Tatars. But I do not agree with him. Perhaps, with the state’s point of view, it is true, but Ukraine does not divide its citizens on ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars. If it applies to them is not good, it does not apply very well to all. But in general, there is even a “fashion” on the Crimean Tatars – the victory Jamal Crimean Tatar cafes throughout Ukraine. And it’s all very brings us.

Vladimir Kara-Murza, a senior: Today we talked about the fate of the Crimean Tatar people in connection with unprofitable for him until court decisions in Russia. But we believe that the future is all the same for these people, who proudly carry their high honor, and we hope that we will continue this topic in a more favorable conditions. Maybe it’s their business will go to the Strasbourg court.

Sourse, 30/09/2016