DAS KRAMER'S MEETING WITH HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 MOSCOW 004174 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/17/2016 TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM RS SUBJECT: DAS KRAMER'S MEETING WITH HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN LUKIN Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Kirk Augustine for reasons 1.4 (b, d). ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: On April 18 EUR Deputy Assistant Secretary David Kramer met with Russian Federation Ombudsman for Human Rights Vladimir Lukin. Addressing Kramer's concern about the recently enacted NGO law, Lukin said that it was still unclear how it would be implemented, but no major moves against NGOs were expected in the lead-up to the G-8 summit. Lukin noted that changes had been made to ease the bureaucratic burden on NGOs. Regarding the recent attack on jailed Yukos head Mikhail Khodorkovskiy, Lukin said he had raised the matter with the Prosecutor General. Lukin said that recent xenophobic attacks in Russia were not unlike attacks in other European countries, but local police and courts needed to do more. Kramer and Lukin discussed how human rights could become an area of constructive engagement in bilateral relations and Lukin proposed creating a human rights and democracy dialogue of five to six non-government experts on each side to discuss bilateral concerns and multilateral issues. END SUMMARY NGO LAW -------------- ¶2. (C) Opening his April 18 meeting with GOR Ombudsman for Human Rights Vladimir Lukin, EUR DAS David Kramer asked for Lukin's impressions of the NGO law, which entered into effect that day. Lukin said that the main issue was how the law would be implemented. Initially, Lukin had been critical of the wording of the bill because it placed a large bureaucratic burden on NGOs. However, he said the final version of the bill and the implementing regulations had addressed this problem, and he would try to convince authorities not to increase requirements on NGOs. Noting that only one NGO, the Union of Migrants, had encountered legal problems in its registration, he felt that this NGO had made mistakes in filing its paperwork. He suggested the U.S. withhold judgment on implementation for several months to see how the law was enforced and to review the situation in a year when the NGOs were required to submit their year-end paperwork. ¶3. (C) Alluding to the G-8 summit, Lukin noted that this was a "special year," and it was unlikely that there would be major moves against NGOs. In response to Kramer's concern that the legal requirements were still too burdensome, Lukin said that remained to be seen and would depend on the federal government's ability to prevent small-time bureaucrats from meddling. He assured Kramer, "I will watch it. I will react because it is my duty." ¶4. (C) Asked how the law would affect the registration of new NGOs, Lukin said that United Russia had introduced a bill in the Moscow City Duma that would make registration more difficult, but the bill had been withdrawn when higher authorities intervened. When Kramer brought up Khodorkovskiy-funded NGO Open Russia's legal troubles, Lukin said that Open Russia's accounts had been frozen as part of the legal proceedings against Yukos. He stressed that Open Russia had not approached him as Human Rights Ombudsman, and noted that he had no authority to intervene in what was a matter of tax law. ATTACK ON KHODORKOVSKIY -------------- ¶5. (C) Lukin said he had raised the recent attack on Mikhail Khodorkovskiy in prison with the Prosecutor General, who said that everything was being done in accordance with the law. Lukin had said that it was illegal to send prisoners, including Khodorkovskiy, to a penal institution far away from the region in which they were tried. The Prosecutor General had told Lukin that in Khodorkovskiy's case security problems required detention in a remote prison. Both Kramer and Lukin saw the irony in this logic in light of the recent attack. Lukin promised to continue to work behind the scenes to move prisoners closer to where they had been tried and said that Khodorkovskiy was "on his conscience." Lukin added that it was strange that Khodorkovskiy declined to file a complaint against the attacker and that descriptions varied on the nature of his injury. XENOPHOBIC ATTACKS -------------- ¶6. (C) When Kramer asked whether xenophobic attacks in Russia were on the rise, Lukin admitted that tension existed in Russia regarding recent immigrants, but no more so than in other European countries. The attacks reflected Russian society's reaction to globalization, post-imperialism and the widening gap between rich and poor. He stressed that mid-level authorities in the justice system and police had MOSCOW 00004174 002 OF 002 failed to address the problem as more than simple hooliganism. In the long-term the problem could be solved by teaching tolerance in the education system, but in the short-term police and courts had to take the problem more seriously. Lukin said that immigration would be affected only by the growth of Russia's economy, not by xenophobic attacks. The question is not whether or not to allow immigration, but how to channel immigrants to less populated, developing regions. He pointed out that the 2002 immigration law had been amended and made less strict, reflecting the government's acceptance of the benefits of immigration. HUMAN RIGHTS AS A BILATERAL CHALLENGE -------------- ¶7. (C) Kramer asked how Russia and the U.S. could engage constructively on questions of human rights without exacerbating tensions. Lukin replied that the human rights issue did not help relations and both sides should spend more time looking inward and less time accusing the other of human rights abuses. He said that this year's U.S. Human Rights Report on Russia was not overstated. His upcoming annual report would detail some, but not all, of the same issues. The U.S. and Russia were both being criticized for abuses of human rights in their struggles against terrorism. He felt that both countries could engage on this issue by setting up an informal discussion of standards and solutions. Lukin promised to discuss the idea with President Putin, while Kramer said he would raise it in the U.S. ¶8. (C) The idea would be to set up a commission or dialogue of five to six non-government experts on each side, people plugged into or influential with their respective governments, to discuss bilateral human rights and democracy concerns as well as multilateral issues such as the UN Human Rights Council. The two sides would issue reports to their respective presidents as well as to their parliaments and to the public. The dialogue would have the blessing of the two countries' presidents and would be an opportunity for an extensive, frank exchange of views. ¶9. (U) DAS Kramer cleared this cable. BURNS