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