LAWYERS' REVOLT - RUSSIAN PUBLIC CHAMBER CONDEMNS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 MOSCOW 001345

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/14/2018
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PINR RS SOCI
SUBJECT: LAWYERS' REVOLT - RUSSIAN PUBLIC CHAMBER CONDEMNS
AMENDMENT TO MEDIA LAW

Classified By: CDA Daniel A Russell. Reason: 1.4 (d).

Summary
--------------


1. (C) Opposition to changes in Russia's media law that would
allow the authorities to close media outlets accused of libel
without a court hearing highlights fractures within the
elite. Yesterday, a Public Chamber working group held
hearings and issued a finding that condemned the draft law
and called for its withdrawal. Coupled with recent public
opposition to proposed limits on lawyers' rights and an
increasingly visible role for the Public Chamber in shaping
legislation, these developments could indicate a bid by
prominent lawyers and other technical experts to ride
Medvedev's coattails to a position of greater influence.
Conversations with one of the more prominent and vocal
advocates, Pavel Astakhov, suggest that this segment of the
elite has ambitious plans at odds with the bureaucratic
stalwarts within the Duma and the government. Their success
in blocking this legislation, which was passed by an
overwhelming majority in its first reading, may provide an
indication of their ability to push the system. End Summary.

The Draft Laws
--------------


2. (SBU) The amendment to the 1991 Law on the Media,
promulgated by United Russia delegate and former "Nashi"
pro-Kremlin youth group press spokesman Robert Shlegel,
sought to add "apparently libelous information denigrating a
person and blackening a person's reputation" to the list of
offenses requiring the authorities to close a media outlet.
(Currently, the ban holds only for the publication of state
secrets, public appeals to terrorist acts, and other
extremist materials.) A closer reading of the draft law
shows that the authorities could close a media outlet if it
receives two warnings from the state media oversight service
(Rossvyazokhrankultury),using a court suspension of
activity. How this legislation would be implemented remains
unclear, suggesting an opportunity for politicized attacks
against particular media outlets.


3. (SBU) On April 25, the Duma passed the bill on the first
of three readings by a vote of 399-1. The timing of the
vote, on the heels the tabloid Moskovskiy Korrespondent's
published report about Putin's putative marriage plans to
gymnast-turned-Duma deputy Alina Kabayeva and the
authorities' sharp reaction (including Putin's gutter talk in
Italy describing reporters "with their snotty noses and
erotic fantasies" as prowling into others' lives),may have
led to such overwhelming support from the delegates.

Opposition from Human Rights Advocates
--------------


4. (C) The near unanimous parliamentary support for the draft
amendment caught many in Moscow off guard and generated
considerable criticism from press advocates and human rights
advocates. Typical of the responses, Tatyana Lokshina at
Human Rights Watch told us that she did not see the
legislation as just a reaction to the Putin article, but
rather as part of a larger effort to continue limiting
avenues for freedom of expression. According to her, the
very proposal of such a change is a problem and could lead to
more self-censorship by the media.


5. (C) Human Rights Ombudsman Lukin's Executive Director
Natalya Mirza told us that Lukin was aware of the law, but
had no legal authority to interfere in the legislative
process. That said, Lukin was speaking to the Presidential
Administration and key members of the Duma "off the record,"
Mirza said. William Smirnov, of the Presidential Council for
Human Rights, told us that the Council was not involved, but
that he was well aware of the Public Chamber's efforts, and
was optimistic they would succeed in derailing the law.

"Legal Pragmatists" Also Oppose
--------------


6. (SBU) Perhaps more surprising has been the reaction by
what could be considered the "legal pragmatists" within
United Russia and the ruling elite - supporters of the
regime, usually with a legal education, who back Putin's
vision for a modernized Russia, but advocate more careful
adherence to the constitution. Shortly after the passage of
the law, the "4 November" club within United Russia, headed
by Committee for Constitutional Legislation and
State-building Chairman Vladimir Pligin and Ekspert magazine
editor-in-chief Valeriy Fadeyev, condemned the amendment as
potentially "harboring a threat of unsubstantiated and

MOSCOW 00001345 002 OF 003


arbitrary actions against mass media." In particular, the
club members were concerned that an oversight body, not a
court, could issue warnings to a media organ on its own
assessment of "libel." Separately, Just Russia Deputy
Aleksandr Babakov took on board our criticism of the draft
and predicted that significant, further discussion would take
place before a second reading.


7. (C) Pavel Astakhov - noted lawyer, Public Chamber member,
novelist, and leader of the "For Putin" movement - has been
one of the more vocal critics of the amendment, perhaps a
reflection of his experience with a libel case against him
and his publisher for his book "Raider," brought by the
Moscow MVD Investigative Division against alleged information
demeaning the honor and dignity of its officers. He told us
that the draft amendment was unconstitutional and violated
Russia's commitments to the Council of Europe; if passed, it
was only a matter of time before it was struck down. While
the merits of the arguments against the amendment were sound,
Astakhov declined to predict whether the draft law could be
significantly amended, given the obedience of the Duma
deputies in lining up behind it (with only one, Boris Reznik,
the Deputy Chairman of the Duma Committee on Information
Policy, voting against).


8. (C) Astakhov chalked up the ease in passage to the
"nervousness" factor surrounding Putin-Kabayeva scandal; the
desire of each Duma deputy to limit the possibility of the
press pointing its microscope on his or her activities; as
well as the paucity of trained lawyers in the legislature.
(To prove his point, he noted the crooner/crime figure Iosif
Kobzon, who still smarts from "unwelcome" press reports that
exposed the more unsavory aspects of his life and his failure
to "get" the journalists who published them, introduces
legislation every session to ease the process of punishing
libel.) Had there been more lawyers in the Duma, Astakhov
argued, the clearly unconstitutional law would not have
passed its first reading.

Public Chamber Condemns Legislation
--------------


9. (SBU) On May 13, a Public Chamber committee held hearings
on the draft amendment which resulted in an unambiguous
rejection of the proposed law and a call for it to be
rescinded. All of the members of the committee save one -
Nashi member Irina Pleshcheva - voted against the amendment
after hearing critical testimony from Astakhov, Secretary of
the Union of Journalists Mikhail Fedotov, journalist and
Medvedev interviewer Nikolay Svanidze, and others. Astakhov
criticized the law as being in violation of international
law, violating the rights of journalists, and opening the
door to extra-judicial actions for political ends. Fedotov
argued that the amendment was unnecessary since Russian law
recognizes defamation as a crime and establishes appropriate
punishments. He further argued that the proposed changes to
the law would require media organizations to prove their
innocence in court - contradicting the
constitutionally-enshrined presumption of innocence.
Svanidze, who also chairs the Public Chamber's Commission for
Inter-Ethnic Relations and Freedom of Conscience, said that
the spirit of the law was offensive to journalists, implying
a diminished role for civil society and public opinion.

10.(SBU) The Public Chamber also took a strong stand against
a law, submitted by Putin to the Duma May 7, that would give
the Federal Registration Service the powers to appeal in
court the lawyers' chamber's refusal to deprive a lawyer of
their status. According to press reports, the Chamber issued
a special finding against the law, noting that it violated
international standards for lawyers' activities, violated the
principles of independence and self-regulation for the
profession, and condemned the legislation as only serving to
strengthen state control over lawyers. Astakhov had been
beating his head against the wall on this issue, advocating
for the profession to be able to manage its own standards and
cadres - as in other countries - and pointed to the
administration's unsuccessful attempts to have former Yukos
head Mikhail Khodorkovskiy's lawyer disbarred as evidence of
the potential risks of this new legislation.

Medvedev, Legal Nihilism, and the Public Chamber
-------------- ---


11. (C) In the coming days, the Duma's reaction to the Public
Chamber's clear rejection of the legislation could provide
insight into President Medvedev's commitment to fighting
"legal nihilism." Astakhov has been working behind the
scenes with Medvedev for the past year or so on a program to
convince Russians that they have legal rights and to inform
the citizenry of the best ways to defend them. As part of

MOSCOW 00001345 003 OF 003


that program, they have introduced a new TV program to better
explain the legal system (admittedly on NTV-Plus, with only a
tiny viewership) and have plans to add radio programming and
the publication of cheap books on particular legal issues.
Already, Astakhov said they have had success with a call-in
program of free legal advice, in which demand of more than
350 calls per day exceeds the capacity of the current
program.


12. (C) Astakhov also said that Medvedev wants to have the
Public Chamber play a more proactive role, ultimately having
the Chamber provide an expert opinion for each piece of
legislation. Astakhov further reported that members of the
Public Chamber have recently been afforded the right to free
access to the Duma premises and to be heard at committee
hearings. Soon, he said, members would receive the right to
have their opinions heard during plenary sessions - a right
they currently do not enjoy.

Comment
--------------


13. (C) While we don't want to read too much into the public
debate about the draft amendment, the case provides the
opportunity for Russia's "legal eagles" - bolstered by the
presence of one of their own in the Kremlin - to check the
more politicized tendencies of the ruling elite. In part
because they themselves are close to the tandem - Astakhov's
"Za Putina" movement rallied Russians to support the Putin
course - their voices are likely to have more resonance than
those of the human rights community here. There is no
guarantee that the findings by the Public Chamber on the
media law or the lawyer oversight amendment will have any
impact on the Duma's vote. But, we will be watching with
interest to see how this particular interest group promotes
its agenda in the coming months.

Bio Info
--------------


14. (C) Pavel Alekseyevich Astakhov studied law at the
University of Pittsburgh in the early 1990s - an experience
that he described as "difficult" but rewarding - and received
a Masters in Law. His experiences there have apparently had
a positive impact, as he described the U.S. system of checks
and balances as the best in the world. Judging by the
plaques on his wall, he has interests in karate and is an
English speaker. There are limits to his pro-Western
approach: he is writing a book, due to come out this summer,
called "Spy" which features on the cover the Lubyanka, with
the plinth of KGB founder Dzerzhinskiy's statue in front, but
topped by the Queen of England. He has a hobby of collecting
magnifying glasses, which he showed to us as we were
gathering to leave, that represent to him the essence of the
legal profession.

RUSSELL