PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Through UN
mechanisms:
UNIVERSAL PERIodic
REVIEW
Dear colleagues!
We
offer material on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) to develop suggestions
and recommendations for implementing human rights in Russia.
Information
source is http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/RUSession16.aspx
The
Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, established in accordance with
Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007, held its sixteenth session
from 22 April to 3 May 2013.
The
review of the Russian
Federation was held at the 12th meeting on
29 April 2013. The delegation of the Russian Federation was headed by
the Minster of Justice,
Alexander Konovalov. At its 18th
meeting, held
on 3 May 2013, the Working Group adopted the report on the Russian Federation.
Russian delegation
noted that the legacy of the past
and various unfavourable factors inherited had
continued to impair the realization of human rights. Systemic risks, such as
arbitrariness of decisions taken by public and municipal officials,
insufficient responsiveness and effectiveness of the courts, and the low level
of public dialogue in society remained, and these had been taken into account
in designing new measures.
The Commissioner of Human Rights
in the Russian Federation
stated that citizens’ insufficient awareness of their
constitutional rights and the lack of ability to properly claim those rights
remained one of the problems impeding the full realisation
of rights enshrined in the Constitution and domestic legislation.
He noted the existing discrepancy
between the principles and provisions of the Constitution and legislation, and
their implementation in practice.
During
the interactive dialogue, 102 delegations made statements. Russian Federation received 231
recommendations.
In
all, the Russian Federation
accepts 149 recommendations, including those whose
content and wording the authorities support, and others that have already been
put into practice or are being implemented.
The
Russian Federation
partially accepts 14 recommendations, some of which, although meeting with the
authorities’ overall approval, cannot be fully supported because they contain
elements that, for various reasons, cannot be put into practice.
The
Russian Federation
does not accept 68 recommendations. It cannot support them either because they
contradict the letter, spirit or practical implementation of the law or certain
trends in its development, or because the assertions made in them reveal
factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies.
Russia’s
dialogue with world community likes a "communication with the
deaf-blind". Russian officials are guided by principle of "see
nothing, hear nothing" and "think one thing, say another, do
third".
Russian authorities bring
situation to a deadlock and often recourse to blatant lies and outright
deception of world community. In the end, it harms more population of Russia,
where the governance principles are roughly discredited, than the UN
bodies.
Russia
presented false and untrue information On several issues.
Russia’s arguments on certain issues come into direct
conflict with information of UN bodies and interested organizations.
RUSSIAN
FOREIGN POLICY is cynical and hypocritical, it is
based on double standards.
Russian
foreign policy agencies, as part of the state mechanism, act in the interests
of corrupt officials and oligarchs, and interests of the majority of Russian
population are ignored.
Russia is constrained
by formal phrases such as “due to contradiction in normative content”, “the
provisions of the United Nations resolution are not binding, but rather
recommendatory in nature”, “it is not a part of the
international obligations of the Russian Federation”, “reject due to
factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies of the assertions”.
Such
verbiage of Russian foreign policy makers is the only argument of denying the
need to implement international norms. It defies any criticism and contrary to
common sense.
Russian
authorities ignore many recommendations concerning the society interests such
as interests of civil society activists, human rights defenders, indigenous
peoples and journalists.
Refusal
of Russia
from full realization of human rights led to total arbitrariness and ubiquity
of lawlessness.
It led to the following hazards:
-usurpation of power by the
minority;
-denial of legitimate rights of
the majority;
-formation of slavish exploitation
of the majority.
The
system of slavish exploitation is a complete lack of socially-oriented state
policy, arbitrariness of employers, complicity of government, population income
below poverty line and understated minimum social standards.
Productive
forces and natural resources of Russia
are aimed only at formation of good life of officials and oligarchs. This led
to unequal distribution of national income of Russia, which is made not by
officials and oligarchs, but by all Russians working in various fields.
Officials
and oligarchs do not produce surplus value, but only usurp natural,
administrative, political and other kinds of rent, that is, dispose and
distribute what is not theirs.
Living
space in Russia
(profitable business, high-paying jobs, lucrative public contracts) is
distributed among officials and oligarchs, their relatives and friends. It is
not possible to ensure equal starting opportunities to all the people of Russia.
In fact feudal slavish system is
approved that deprives future of further generations of Russians.
It
violates the constitutional rights and the international norms relating to
access to housing, food, education and medicine. Ordinary Russians can not
normally live, eat, learn and be treated.
Instead of the right to decent
work, the right to perpetual economic slavery is approved in Russia, as
wages of ordinary people may not ensure a decent life.
According
to official state data, less than 20% of the Russian population has income
below the subsistence minimum. But
really the majority of Russians live below poverty line because
undervaluation of minimum social standards, low real purchasing power of cash
income, unreliability of average statistical data, overestimating prices and
tariffs.
Real information on the actual
socio-economic situation of Russia
will be presented to the UN bodies.
Absence
of conditions for a decent life not only leads to lower quality of life, but
also to elementary hunger and total poverty, consequence of which is physical
extinction of population.
Massive
violations of the rights to decent life threatens physical survival of RUSSIAN
POPULATION.
Actually,
it is the deliberate creation of unbearable living conditions in order to
suppress the will and desires of the citizens of Russia on the implementation of
their legal rights to a decent life. Under certain circumstances it may be
classified as creating conditions for genocide.
Systematic appeals of international organizations to
Russian authorities to respect human rights is primarily
connected with implementing human rights and not with political opposition of
different countries.
Thus, implementing human rights is
not associated with activities of "enemies of Russia" and "politically
motivated" acts of NGOs. But it is the main constitutional purpose of
existence of Russian state - observance and protection of fundamental rights
and freedoms of citizens.
Russia justifies its irresponsibility and violation of human
rights because:
-some
international norms are contrary to state policy;
-nature
of UN resolutions is recommendatory;
-intrigues of political rivals - "enemies of Russia".
Russia simply abuses international
law, legalizing tyranny and lawlessness.
HOW may
universally recognized international norms and right to a decent life contrary
to Russian state policy?
What
relation to poverty, famine and physical extinction of Russians is the European
Union, NATO and other "enemies"?
Russia
states one argument that it is impossible to provide a decent life for majority
because there is no financial capacity of the country's budget. But it could be
taken in situation
with poor African countries.
Russia’s
priorities of budget spending do not take into account interests of the majority
of population. Use of natural resources and productive forces is aimed at
enriching the minority.
If Russian authorities have not
enough money to ensure a decent life for majority, how to ensure good living of
minority, when 1.5% of Russia's
population own 50% of the national assets?
How
did 131 Russian billionaires with a total capital of 147 billion appear?
Why
do Russian billionaires pay the lowest taxes in the world (13%) when their
counterparts pay the higher taxes: in France
and Sweden (57%), Denmark (61%) and Italy (66%)?
Why
are billions of dollars spent for extremely expensive summits and sporting
events, when the majority live in poverty ?
Why
is the ratio of income of the richest 10% and poorest citizens in Russia
45 times or more, and in developed countries 6-7 times, with maximum critical
value of 10, above which uncontrollable social antagonizing begins and security
risks for state existing
occur ?
Why
does social impact of economic development affect mainly the only Russians with
the highest income and lower-income groups consistently have low quality of living ?
Why
is the share of public expenditure on social services (education, health,
culture, etc.) in developed countries - 70%, in Russia - 15%?
Why
is the share of public expenditure on the state apparatus, internal security
and defense in the developed countries - 11%, in Russia - 42%?
Why
does capital outflow, held for money laundering, equal annual 3-4% of gross
domestic product (for the period 1994-2012 years, the 343 billion dollars were
derived from Russia)?
Facts
indicate that, in contrast to developed countries, RUSSIA have not full socially
oriented state policy and enrichment of the minority HAPPENED ILLEGALLY with
violations of social justice principles.
As
a result of unfair privatization, they became billionaires as opposed to
foreign entrepreneurs whose capitals were formed over a long period of time.
Overseas
employees, holding shares, participate in decision-making and are interested in
achieving the overall result of the enterprise. In Russia, the employees are often
disenfranchised people who depend on arbitrariness of the owner. Russian
relationship between employees and employer is based on slavish exploitation in
order to maximize profits but abroad it is based on equal social partnership.
It is
false that Russia
has not possibility of ensuring decent life for majority of Russians due to
lack of financial ability of budget.
Russian
politicians just lies when they, answering questions on implementing provisions
of decent material standard of living, say that it is contrary to state policy
and state has no financial resources.
Russia has enough financial resources to
increase the incomes of Russians and the Constitution of Russia
identifies as a priority to ensure decent life for citizens.
It
is obvious that there is a contradiction between international law and
"state policy of Russia",
which replaced by interests of enrichment of minority.
The strategy of "live well at
the expense of slavish exploitation of the majority and predatory extraction of natural
resources" not focused on the main purpose of functioning of the Russian
state and the constitutional right to decent life.
According
to the explanatory memorandum to the draft Federal Law "On the rights of
Russian citizens on incomes from exploitation of natural resources of the
Russian Federation", proper redistribution of revenues from natural
resources provide a possibility of paying annually several living minimum to
every Russian citizen.
Of course, it's not so much money,
but in any case it is better than transfer of funds to intermediaries, engaged
in bringing them to population, in the face of government agencies, officials
and bankers.
It
will clearly lead to positive results coupled with introduction of a
progressive income tax scale, increasing the understated social standards,
stimulating private consumption and other socially oriented measures.
IF
RUSSIAN AUTHORITIES WANT TO CONTINUE MAKing statements on INABILITY to ensure
decent life for the majority, they should change the constitution of RUSSIA and
APPROVE that the main objective is not to ensure the rights and freedoms of
citizens but only to PROVIDe rights of officials and oligarchs for good LIFE
THROUGH slavish exploitation of population and destructive extraction of
natural resources.
It will be fair and nobody can
accuse Russia
of lying and deception.
In
that case Russian authorities may honestly state at global level that
international standards for decent life are contrary to the Constitution of
Russia and its legal system.
And
Russia
has obligations only to officials and oligarchs. And all attempts of improving
life for majority are "intrigues of the enemies" and interference in
internal affairs.
However, it should be noted that
the rules of international law were developed to improve the lives of people,
but not to justify the irresponsible policies of different countries.
There
are massive and flagrant violations of human rights for a long time in Russia.
In 2009 Russian NGOs stated that the recommendations of UN treaty bodies are
generally not performed and published.
It
may continue indefinitely without applying relevant sanctions to Russia.
RUSSIA
discredits the international protection of human rights that requires adoption
of measures at international level.
Therefore, I propose to initiate a
more detailed consideration of the human rights situation in Russia and take
adequate measures in order to:
-adjust legislation and law
enforcement practice in Russia;
-prosecute Russia for
false information and failure to comply with human rights.
It
is important to use all available international instruments to influence the
situation. In the case of exhausting all means, it is necessary to take
appropriate enforcement measures against Russia in the framework of the
international legal responsibility.
The principles of international
legal responsibility mean that:
-every
subject of international law is responsible for its behavior in relation to its
obligations under international law;
-act
of subject of international law consists in action or inaction.
In
this case, Russia
violates the rights of citizens to decent life enshrined in international law.
Therefore,
in the case of exhausting all means to realize human rights, the United Nations
bodies and other stakeholders MUST TAKE adequate coercive MEASURES against RUSSIA, that
is, apply sanctions enshrined in international law.
Sanctions
are coercive measures taken against a state which has committed an international
illegal act or has seriously breached an international rule or obligation, by a
state or a group of states or decided by an international organization.
The essence of negative effects of
sanctions is implementing the principle "the suffering of the population
will lead to pressure on the government".
Poor,
hungry and destitute majority of Russian population, which has lost the last
hope for better life, uniquely will support these measures.
The
aim is to suppress for improving the situation that will ensure removal of the
sanctions regime.
During discussion we propose to
select the following sanctions:
1.Trade sanctions
(full or partial embargo, cessation of maintenance);
2.Financial sanctions
(blocking foreign government assets, limited access to financial markets, the
termination of the provision of financial assistance);
3.Sanctions on
movement (ban on movement of certain individuals or groups of individuals
beyond the borders of state, ban on movement of any means of communication);
4.Diplomatic
sanctions (complete or partial withdrawal of members of diplomatic missions
from the target country; revocation of diplomatic visas);
5.Sport and
cultural sanctions (prohibition against participation of person or group of
persons, representing the target country, in sport events.;
termination of scientific, technical and cultural cooperation through exchanges
and visits involving persons or groups of persons, representing the target
country);
6.Procedural sanctions
(suspension or deprivation of voting rights, deprivation of the right to
representation in elected bodies of international organizations, rejection or
exclusion from membership in international organizations).
The most common sanctions are the
following sanctions:
-ban
on travel. It is used exclusively against persons responsible for the unlawful
acts of the state. It consists in banning such persons to leave territory of
the state.
-Freezing
of assets. It is used exclusively against persons responsible for the unlawful
acts of the state. It consists in prohibition to use the assets of such persons
located outside of the state.
-Arms
embargo. It is used against the state. It consists in prohibition to all other States
to supply weapons or their components in volume, amount and on the terms
provided by the UN Security Council.
Also, it
is appropriate to consider blocking foreign assets of Russia and Russia's exclusion from
international organizations because asset management and internationalk
activity carry out not in the interests of the majority of Russian population,
but only in the interests of OFFICIALS and oligarchs.
Regardless
of status, all persons responsible for human rights violations must be prosecuted.
After all, when a person commits an offense, he must be brought to justice, but
not to refer to "the enemies."
There is good practice of applying
bans on travel and freezing of assets for specific guilty officials.
For
practical implementation of the principle of inevitability of punishment, it is
necessary to find the persons responsible for human rights violations in Russia and
bring them to justice.
Sanctions
regime could be removed after adoption of measures on elimination of
infringements of human rights.
We propose to consider the
statement of NGO "Yakutia – Our Opinion",
as a basis of urgent actions, was circulated at the High-level segment (annual
ministerial review) of Substantive 2013 session of the United Nations Economic
and Social Council in Geneva,
Switzerland.
Statement
available at http://yakutian.org/N1330901.pdf
It should be noted that all the
initiatives of NGO "Yakutia - Our Opinion"
aimed at protecting human rights to decent life and access to fair justice. Our
initiatives may not be interpreted as politically motivated acts.
Their
goal is not to make changes in political system and state mechanism, but mainly
include economic and legal issues. This does not contradict the principles of
state functioning.
ACTIVITY
OF NGO "Yakutia - OUR OPINION" is carried out strictly within the
legal framework and aimed at preserving political stability.
Due to precedents of claims of
Russian authorities against legitimate activity of our organization, I, Stepan Petrov, Chief of NGO
"Yakutia - Our Opinion" inform publicly
that appropriate measures will be taken at global level in the case of
initiation of hostile actions to impede development of initiatives to implement
the human rights under the authority given by Special Consultative Status
with the ECOSOC of the United Nations.
In
that case, relevant applications will be submitted for taking adequate measures
against Russia
to the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Economic and Social Council, the
Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur on the
situation of Human Rights Defenders and other UN bodies.
We
will also inform the European Union, relevant international organizations and
world’s leading human rights organizations.
It
should be noted that the United Nations representatives recognized some of the
arguments of Russian diplomats unfounded and biased. It was confirmed that some
of the actions of Russian officials are illegal and provocative.
Subject
to ensure normal activity and safety of human rights defenders is relevant and
given due attention at the highest level.
In September 2013, UN Secretaty-General Ban Ki-moon
denounced cases of reprisals against NGOs engaging in the UPR.
At
the 24th session of the Human Rights Council (HRC) the UN Secretary-General
presented his annual report "Cooperation with the United Nations, its
representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights". The report
describes specific cases of reprisals against NGOs engaging with human rights
mechanisms, including the UPR.
Ban
Ki-moon reiterated that "reprisals and intimidation against individuals cooperating with the
United Nations in the field of human rights are unacceptable" and
called on the HRC to "act to
address cases of reprisal in a coherent and systematic manner and use the
various tools it has at its disposal".
Non-governmental
organizations play an important role in relationship between civil society and
the States. Therefore, all facts of countering activities of human rights defenders
and trends in this area should be considered at the highest level, primarily
through the activities of the UN General Assembly.
We must promote initiatives and
proposals to global level for full realization of human rights.
We
have the opportunity to make suggestions through various UN mechanisms (UPR,
the UN treaty bodies, special procedures, etc.) through UN bodies, the States
participating in the interactive dialogue and stakeholders who have the right
to submit alternative reports.
The
materials of the UPR have a lot of relevant topics: human rights legislation
and institutions; international cooperation in the field of human rights;
promotion of tolerance; right to life, liberty and security of the person;
administration of justice and the judicial system; civil liberties, NGOs, human
rights defenders, journalists and elections; economic, social and cultural
rights, rights of ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples.
At present, Russian NGOs have
accumulated a vast array of information on the human rights situation. I find
it necessary to use it to correct russian
legislation and law practice.
Human
rights work in this area may be bilateral (both "particular to
general" and
"general to particular") and is aimed at:
-correcting
russian legislation through providing information on the human rights situation in order to
strengthen operating efficiency of members of interactive dialogue in the UN;
-correcting law and judicial practices through
applying the UN decisions.
It should be aimed at addressing
the underlying legal issues:
-lack
of specific mechanisms of full realization of human rights in Russia, when
law practices do not meet the stated declarations;
-legal
ambiguity, allowing arbitrary interpretation of various events and actions in
favor of political and other conditions;
-direct
violation of human rights by representatives of state bodies and other
entities, their irresponsibility, problem with implementing principle of
inevitability of punishment.
In order to use the potential of
the highest law enforcement body of the world community - the UN Human Rights
Council in practical protection of human rights,
We urge to participate in:
-developing recommendations,
conclusions and other decisions of the HRC on actual issues;
-implementing the UN resolutions
through correcting legislation and law practice in Russia;
-developing
and applying long-term measures to realize legal position of the United Nations
in Russia’s
decision-making process.
Samples of developing own proposals
Sample No.1
Germany
made recommendation ¹140.122 - Establish an independent body responsible for
the appointment, promotion, transfer and discharge of judges (Germany).
Russia did not accept it and informed
that the relevant independent bodies have already been established.
However,
there are many instances of crimes committed by judges and avoiding
responsibility. Often, the supervisory authorities cover up crimes by their
colleagues.
The
Supreme Court of the Russian
Federation is inactive and inefficient in
many cases.
The following may be done:
1.-present facts to refute the position of Russia.
2.-propose
project of new structure or mechanism to monitor the work of judges.
Sample No.2
Netherlands
made recommendation ¹140.191 - Investigate all cases of aggressions or threats
against human rights defenders, journalists, and civil society activists (Netherlands).
Russia accepted
it.
However,
the practice of investigations is often ineffective. In most cases, results may
be achieved only by putting pressure from civil society.
The following may be done:
-offer
a special mechanism to consider such cases in view of social significance of
their activities.
Sample No.3
France made
recommendation ¹140.104 - Adopt and implement a law prohibiting the use of
confessions obtained under torture.
Russia accepted
it. Article 75 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that evidence,
obtained in violation of the law, are not inadmissible.
According
to human rights organizations accusations on complaints of torture are often
imposed for less serious offences (abuse of power, coercion to testify).
The following may be done:
-offer
a mechanism to uniquely qualify such actions as torture.
Sample No.4
Denmark
made a recommendation ¹140.223. - Officially endorse the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and fully implement all relevant national
laws and regulations.
Russia did not accept it and stated
that Russian legislation and law enforcement practice in respect of the rights
of indigenous peoples and the preservation and development of their cultures
goes substantially further than the provisions of the Declaration, extending
its boundaries. Legislation already gives small indigenous peoples priority in
the use of land and natural resources.
Russia presented false and untrue information.
Indigenous
peoples are still deprived of priority access to lands and natural resources,
and cannot influence activities of industrial enterprises, operating on their
traditional lands.
Russian
officials removed norms from legislation on free use of lands by indigenous
peoples.
Despite
the adoption of the Federal law «On territories of traditional nature use of
indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation»
there is not a single territory of traditional nature use.
The following may be done:
-offer mechanism to enforce the rights of indigenous
peoples and measures to prosecute Russian authorities for infringement of the
rights of indigenous peoples.
Sample No.5
The United States
presented a recommendation ¹ 140.26 - Amend the law “On counteracting extremist
activities” to define extremism in terms of actual use of violence.
Russia did not
accept it. The current practice of identifying extremism makes it possible to
prosecute any unwanted subjects of civil society.
The following may be done:
-offer to articulate a definition of
"extremism" in order to prevent any prosecution of human rights
activists.
You
can submit your proposals to e-mail: post@yakutian.org
or
postal address: PO Box 70, Post
Office 27, 677027 Yakutsk, Russian Federation
Phone:
+7(914)224-24-11
Chief
NGO "Yakutia
- Our Opinion"
in Special Consultative Status
with the Economic and Social Council
of the United Nations
Stepan Petrov
REVIEW
of some recommendations of the States and Russia's
position
The
recommendations are grouped in 9 thematic clusters. Items 140.***
are recommendations of the States. The following is the position of Russia
and, if available, clarification of position.
A
brief commentary of the author is provided on each thematic cluster.
Information
of the UN bodies and interested organizations coincides with author’s position
in the majority of issues. It testifies that Russia presented false and
inaccurate information, as well as non-acceptance of effective measures.
Information
of UN bodies and interested organizations is available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/RUSession16.aspx
You
can see topical information on violation of civil rights in Russia in the report of the world's
leading human rights organization Human Rights Watch «Laws of Attrition.
Crackdown on Russia’s
Civil Society after Putin’s Return to the Presidency»
at
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2013/04/24/laws-attrition
1. Human rights legislation
and institutions
140.56.
Continue the policy of expanding opportunities in the existing legislation and
mechanisms of influence of civil society in decision-making process (Kazakhstan)
- accepted;
140.57.
Continue policies aimed at intensifying the fight against all forms of
corruption (Kazakhstan)
- accepted;
140.58.
Continue its efforts to intensify the fight against all forms of corruption (Morocco)
- accepted;
140.59.
Encourage openness and transparency in the functioning of the public bodies (Kyrgyzstan)
- accepted;
140.60.
Give continuity to legislative and institutional reforms for the promotion and
protection of human rights (Nepal)
- accepted;
140.61.
Actively engage with public councils under the
State bodies while developing measures aimed at ensuring human rights in
a more comprehensive manner (Sri Lanka) - accepted;
140.26.
Amend the law “On counteracting extremist activities” to define extremism in
terms of actual use of violence (United States of America) – not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The detailed definition of extremism set forth in the
legislation is not contrary to the Russian Federation’s international
commitments and is duly applied by law enforcement agencies and the courts.
Author's comment
Russia
continues to create a semblance of ”rampant activity”
on implementation of international standards. In reality, human rights in Russia
are grossly violated.
There
are systemic problems associated with the lack of specific mechanisms for the
full implementation of human rights, when law enforcement practices do not meet
the declarations.
There
is no effective system of civilian control over activities of state
authorities. The existing authority system led to actual elimination of social
responsibility of officials at all levels.
Despite
of implementation of administrative and budget reforms have still not met the
legality and transparency in the expenditure of budgetary funds.
In
Russia
there is no effective fight against corruption. Article 20 of the UN Convention
against Corruption is not ratified. A number of existing international
anti-corruption standards are not implemented.
According to the international organization
Transparency International Russia ranked 154th on the annual Corruption
Perceptions Index of 178 countries.
Political
environment in Russia
is not competitive. Rro-Kremlin United Russia party have a dominant position. There are violations of
Principles of Democracy in Russian electoral system.
2.
International cooperation in the field of human rights
140.65.
Extend a standing invitation to all thematic special procedures (Montenegro)
– not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The Russian
Federation regularly receives visits from
special procedures of the Human Rights Council and will, to the extent that it
is able, continue to do so, taking into account the importance to it of any
given matter and the need to prepare for such visits properly.
140.66.
Extend a standing invitation to special procedures (Guatemala) – not accepted;
140.67.
Invite the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human
rights defenders to visit (Norway) – not accepted;
140.68.
Issue a standing invitation to all special procedures mandate holders and
respond positively to requests for their visits (Slovenia) – not accepted;
140.69.
Issue a standing invitation to all United Nations Special Procedures and ratify
OP-CAT and establish its national preventive mechanism accordingly (Czech Republic)
– not accepted;
140.70.
Present its standing invitation to the special procedures of the United Nations Human Rights
Council (The Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia) – not accepted;
Author's comment
Special
procedure is one of the most effective tools of detailed consideration of the
human rights situation. This mechanism provides to develop the most effective
and comprehensive recommendations on elimination of the revealed violations.
Russian
authorities are simply afraid to invite special procedures. They want to
conceal negative human rights situation and avoid responsibility, as it will
lead to disclosure of gross violations of human rights and adoption of relevant
procedural decisions at the international level.
3. Equality and
non-discrimination – general issues
140.75.
Introduce a definition of direct and indirect discrimination to prevent
discrimination in specific spheres, such as those relating to women, children,
migrants and indigenous peoples (Paraguay) – not accepted;
Russia's
position.
Russian law already contains a detailed definition of
both direct and indirect discrimination.
Acts
of discrimination are punishable under criminal and administrative law. The
Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative Offences each contain definitions
of discrimination. Moreover, the victims of such acts are entitled to sue the
perpetrator for damages.
Author's comment
There
is no effective practice of accountability on the facts of discrimination. In
most cases, law enforcement and judicial authorities refuse such cases.
Successful cases of discrimination
in recruitment are exceptional.
4. Promotion of tolerance.
Combating racism,
racial discrimination and
xenophobia
140.85.
Continue efforts to address hate crimes and racially motivated attacks against
ethnic and religious minorities, including racial profiling by law enforcement
personnel (Botswana)
- accepted;
Russia's
position.
The authorities investigate such crimes with the
utmost diligence and will continue to take all the necessary steps to establish
the identity of the perpetrators and bring them to justice.
Author's comment
We
note extremely low efficiency of counteraction to such crimes. The inaction of
law enforcement agencies in this field provokes the growth of xenophobia and
impunity for perpetrators. In some cases, law enforcement officials commit
crimes on ethnic and religious basis.
5. Right to life, liberty and security of
the person.
Combating human trafficking
140.102.
Ending use of arbitrary detention, torture and excessive force by law
enforcement officials (United
States of America) – not accepted;
Russia's
position.
Because of factual inaccuracies
and inconsistencies in the recommendation’s content and form.
The
law enforcement agencies of the Russian
Federation do not engage in arbitrary
detentions, torture or excessive use of force. Detention and other coercive
measures are carried out in accordance with procedural law, which provides
effective safeguards against civil rights violations.
Any
instances of improper treatment of detainees are duly investigated by the
Investigative Committee and Office of the Procurator-General. Law enforcement
officers found guilty are subject to prosecution as stipulated under the law.
140.104.
Adopt and implement a law prohibiting the use of confessions obtained under torture
(France)
- accepted;
Russia's
position.
Under Article 75 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
evidence obtained in violation of the law (including through the use of
violence, torture and other cruel or degrading treatment) is inadmissible. Such
evidence does not have legal force and may not be used as grounds for
prosecution.
Author's comment
Russia’s information on absence of
the practice of arbitrary detention, torture and excessive use of force is
false.
In
Russia
there are many facts of crimes against detainees citizens committed by law
enforcement officials.
In
most cases, consideration of applications is carried out formally and does not
lead to prosecution of perpetrators. Often officers, who consider such
messages, use the solidarity principle in their activity and cover up crimes by
their colleagues. There is no effective control mechanism for considering such
applications.
According
to human rights organizations accusations on complaints of torture are often
imposed for less serious offences (abuse of power, coercion to testify).
The
law enforcement system of Russia
is configured to mitigation of prosecution of guilty law enforcement officials,
engaged in torture and violent actions. It leads to avoiding prosecution and
stimulates growth of crime among law enforcement officials.
6. Administration of justice
and the judicial system
140.120.
Pursue reforms of the Judiciary as well as its efforts to guarantee and
facilitate access to justice for all its citizens (Morocco) - accepted;
Russia's
position.
The Russian authorities have already made extensive
regulatory and organizational changes in this area in recent years.
One
of the main challenges in the development of the judicial system is to ensure
access to justice for citizens and maximum transparency in the work of the
courts. A Federal Act that came into force in 2010 made mandatory the
publication on the Internet of the texts of judicial instruments and other
information relating to the activities of the judicial system as a whole, as
well as of individual courts and judges.
The
Federal Act on Free Legal Assistance, which came into force in January 2012,
provides further guarantees of access to qualified legal advice for citizens.
An
effective mechanism has been established to ensure that trials are held and
court rulings are executed within a reasonable time, allowing citizens to claim
compensation for unreasonable delays by the authorities in this respect.
An
appeals chamber dealing with all categories of cases has been set up in courts
of general jurisdiction to speed up the judgement
review process.
A
new Code of Judicial Ethics adopted in December 2012 gives a detailed
explanation of the mandatory rules of conduct for all judges in both their
professional and other activities.
The
Russian authorities intend to continue their efforts to make further
improvements to the judicial system, which they consider to be the most
important mechanism in a modern State governed by the rule of law.
140.121.
Continue efforts on judicial reform, ensuring meaningful, independent accountability mechanisms and
improved transparency throughout the judicial process (Canada) - accepted;
140.122.
Establish an independent body responsible for the appointment, promotion,
transfer and discharge of judges (Germany) – not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The relevant independent bodies have already been
established.
Under
the Constitution, federal court judges are appointed by the President of the Russian Federation.
Justices of the peace are appointed to their duties by the legislative bodies
of the relevant constituent entity of the Russian Federation or are elected
by the population of the judicial district concerned.
Examination
commissions, which administer the qualifying examinations for judges, and judicial
qualification boards are independent bodies within the
judicial community. Their membership includes representatives of the public.
Complaints
about decisions of judicial qualification boards in respect of early
termination of a judge’s term of office for breach of discipline are reviewed
by a special judicial authority, the Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal.
Author's comment
There
are serious problems of access to justice in Russia. Russian courts make a large
number of unjust decisions.
There
is deplorable human rights situation in Russia because Russians submit the
maximum number of complaints to the European Court of Human Rights and the
judges commit a large number of crimes.
Corruption
in Russia
has systematic and comprehensive manner, but not isolated and sporadic.
Corruption crimes are committed by not individual officials and law enforce
officials, but the organized criminal community consisting of officials, judges
and law enforcement officers.
There
are many instances of crimes committed by judges and avoiding responsibility.
Often, the supervisory authorities cover up crimes by their colleagues.
7. Civil liberties, NGOs,
human rights defenders,
journalists and elections
140.145.
Fully ensure everyone’s right to exercise freedom of expression, including
internet freedom, strengthen the dialogue with civil society and respect the
rights of NGOs by eliminating all restrictive impediments (Estonia) - partially accepted;
Russia's
position.
Pursuant to article 29 of the Constitution, everyone
has the right to freely seek out, receive, transmit, produce and disseminate
information by any legal means. The freedom of the media is guaranteed.
Censorship is prohibited.
However,
under article 10, paragraph 2, of the European Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to which the Russian Federation is a
party, the exercise of freedom of expression may be subject to certain
formalities, conditions, restrictions or sanctions, which are provided for by
law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national
security, territorial integrity or public order, in order to prevent disorder
or crime, to protect health and morals, or the reputation or rights of other
persons, to prevent the disclosure of information received confidentially, or
to ensure the authority and impartiality of the justice system.
Thus,
the freedom of expression is not absolute and the recommendation to ensure its
implementation “by eliminating all restrictive impediments” cannot be accepted.
The
Federal Information, Information Technology and Protection of Information Act
(No. 149-FZ of 27 June 2006) defined, in all, four categories of information
that represent a particular danger to society and may be banned from the
Internet without recourse to legal action: (1) child pornography; (2) methods
for the manufacture, use and distribution of drugs; (3) methods of suicide and
suicide advocacy; (4) personal information on minors who have been victims of
unlawful acts.
140.148.
Pay particular attention to the issue of protecting journalists and those
working for the mass media in order to ensure the freedom and the legitimacy of
their activities (Algeria) - accepted;
Russia's
position.
Crimes against journalists and human rights defenders
have serious and harmful consequences on the development of society as a whole
and consolidation of the idea of a State governed by the rule of law. The law
enforcement agencies thus place high priority on investigating and preventing
such crimes.
140.149.
Intensify efforts to investigate cases of violence and intimidation against
journalists and ensure that perpetrators are held to account (Austria) – accepted, see 140.148;
140.150.
Investigate thoroughly, promptly and impartially all allegations of intimidation
and violence against journalists and human rights defenders and bring the
perpetrators to justice (Ireland)
- accepted, see 140.148;
140.151.Remove
legislative and other regulations which limit the legitimate exercise of the
rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly and ensure that
legislation is in accordance with the Russian Federation’s commitments and
obligations under international law (Norway) – not accepted;
Russia's
position.
Because of factual inaccuracies
and inconsistencies in the recommendation’s content and wording.
The legislation does not limit the exercise of the right to freedom of
expression, association and assembly, and is not contrary to the rules of
international law.
140.152.
Take necessary measures to ensure that legal provisions do not create
disproportionate restrictions to exercise freedom of assembly and expression (Latvia)
- accepted;
Russia's
position.
Russian legislation does not create disproportionate
restrictions on the exercise of freedom of assembly and expression.
The
Constitution guarantees the right to assemble peacefully, without weapons, and
to hold meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets. Realization of
this right is an important form of citizen participation in the conduct of State
affairs.
The
legislation establishes a notification system for the holding of public events.
An authority may refuse to agree to the holding of a public event only if the
notification was submitted by a person who is not legally entitled to organize
public events, or if it specifies a place where the holding of public
activities is prohibited by law.
Citizens
and organizations may challenge the authority’s decision in a court of law.
140.153.
Review recent legislative changes with a view to fully ensuring freedom of
assembly and association, in accordance with international obligations (Austria)
– not accepted;
Russia's
position.
In the part concerning the right to freedom of
association, it should be made clear that enjoyment of that right is guaranteed
by the international treaties to which the Russian Federation is a party.
There is no restriction in the law on the activities of non-commercial
organizations, including those that receive funding from abroad and participate
in political activities. The main objective of the legislative changes was to
ensure greater transparency in the activities of the relevant non-commercial
organizations. The public are entitled to know about the sources of funding for
political activities in the country.
140.158. Put an end to all
practices limiting activities of civil society, and take concrete steps to
guarantee the freedom of association (Czech Republic)
- not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The Russian authorities do not limit the activities of
non-commercial organizations; indeed, they seek to ensure the widest possible
involvement of civil society in governance of the State.
The
2012 reform of the legislation on political parties significantly relaxed the
requirements for their establishment and functioning. As a result, more than 70
political parties have been registered. There are also more than 90 organizing
committees for the establishment of new political parties.
140.161. End the widespread
practice of arresting participants at opposition rallies and pressing charges
against them (Austria)
- not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The right of peaceful assembly is guaranteed by the
Constitution. However, the exercise of this right may not violate the rights
and freedoms of other citizens and, in particular, their right to personal and
public safety, which must be guaranteed by the law enforcement agencies during
public events.
In
the performance of their duties, officers of the law enforcement agencies are subject
only to the authority of the law and apply it equally to all participants in
any public events.
140.165. Alleviate
legislative and administrative barriers related to the functioning of NGOs and
civil society, recognizing the legitimacy of their work and contribution for
the society (Slovakia)
- not accepted;
140.165 Not accepted
Russia's
position.
Russian law does not impose any legislative or
administrative barriers that restrict the activities of non-commercial
organizations or civil society.
140.167. Ensure that all human rights defenders are
able to conduct their work in line with the provisions of the United Nations
Declaration on Human Rights Defenders
(Poland) - accepted;
140.168.
Fully implement the provisions of the Human Rights Council’s resolution on
“protecting human rights defenders” adopted in March 2013 (Norway) - not accepted;
Russia's
position.
Russian law and the international treaties to which
the Russian Federation
is a party provide a satisfactory level of protection for the rights of
citizens and organizations and offer opportunities for their effective
protection.
Furthermore,
the provisions of the United Nations Human Rights Council resolution are not
binding, but rather recommendatory in nature, and are not a part of the
international obligations of the Russian Federation.
140.169.
In line with the resolution by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe adopted on 2 October 2012, amend the new law on NGOs so that it cannot
be used as an instrument of repression and intimidation of NGOs and civil
society (Sweden) - not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The legislation does not allow these regulations to be
used for the purpose of intimidation or harassment of non-commercial
organizations or civil society.
140.170.
Ensure that the laws concerning non-governmental organizations do not impose
undue obstacles for their functioning (Latvia) - accepted;
140.171.
Review its legislation regulating the functioning of NGOs, in particular the
Federal Law on Non-Commercial Organizations, with a view to bringing it into
accordance with international human rights law (Finland) - not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The legislation does not establish any restrictions
that might be inconsistent with the obligations arising from international
treaties to which the Russian
Federation is a party.
140.172.
Rescind or soften the
law “on the modification to certain laws of the Russian Federation on regulating the activities
of non-commercial organizations which exercise function of foreign agents” (Belgium)
- not accepted;
140.174.
Reconsider legislation adopted on inspections and audits to NGOs (Spain)
- not accepted;
140.175.
Repeal the amendment which requires NGOs
that accept foreign funding to register and identify themselves as
“foreign agents”, as well as the amended definition of treason, and punish any
harassment, intimidation or discrediting of civil society groups (Ireland) - partially accepted;
Russia's
position.
Repeal the registration of non-commercial
organizations as “foreign agents” – not accepted.
Amend
the definition of treason – not accepted. Taking into account the broad
discretion that exists in establishivng
responsibility for offences against the foundations of the constitutional order
and the security of the State, the Russian legislature introduced necessary
clarifications into the relevant articles of the Criminal Code. There is at
this time no basis for repealing the amendments made.
Prosecution
for any harassment, threats or discrediting of civil society groups – accepted.
Ensuring the security and equality of rights of citizens is an absolute
priority for the Russian authorities.
140.177.
Work with the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders to ensure that their
law governing NGOs guarantees effective implementation of the declaration on
human rights defenders (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) -
partially accepted;
Russia's
position.
The Russian
Federation cooperates actively with the
Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders on
individual cases and on general requests in accordance with national law.
However,
when considering the advisability of amending the legislation governing
non-commercial organizations, the Russian authorities will be guided primarily
by the interests of citizens of the Russian Federation and may take
account of the views of the relevant international bodies as necessary.
140.178.
Repeal provisions of the legislation regulating NGOs that require the
registration of organizations receiving financial support from outside sources
as “foreign agents” (Slovakia)
- not accepted;
140.179.
Revise the law
on “foreign agents” and
adopt measures in order to facilitate and enhance dialogue and practical
cooperation between Government and civil society (Italy) - not accepted;
140.180.
Review the law on demonstrations and the so-called law on “foreign agents”, in
order to allow NGOs
to freely carry
out their activities
in Russia (France) - not accepted;
140.181.
Review legislation and registration according to which NGOs that accept foreign
funding must register and identify themselves as “foreign agents” (Germany) - not accepted;
140.182.
Take appropriate legislative measures to void the legislation requiring human
rights organizations that receive foreign funding to register as “foreign
agents” (Poland) - not accepted;
140.183.
The removal of legislation that restricts civil society from receiving
international funding, and cease unannounced inspections aimed at intimidating
civil society organizations (United States of America) - not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The legislation does not restrict civil society from
receiving funding from abroad, nor non-commercial organizations from conducting
political activities. The main objective of the amendments to the legislation
on non-commercial organizations is to ensure greater transparency in their
activities.
Checks
on non-commercial organizations are carried out in accordance with the relevant
rules of law and are not in any way intended to put pressure on them. If they
disagree with the process or results of these checks, the organizations do have
the possibility to challenge the inspectors’ actions in court.
140.191.
Investigate all cases of aggressions or threats against human rights defenders,
journalists, and civil society activists (Netherlands) - accepted;
Author's comment
Russian
state policy is aimed at suppressing dissent and civil society. It encroaches
on civil liberties.
Legislative
initiatives (laws on «foreign agents», treason, assembly, internet content
restriction and other) aimed at restricting the activities of non-governmental
human rights organizations and activists to prevent or repress criticism of the
government.
According to Human Rights Watch
the laws and government actions violate Russia’s
international legal obligations to protect freedom of association, expression,
and assembly and threaten the viability of Russia’s vibrant civil
society.
In
the year since Vladimir Putin’s return to the
presidency in May 2012, the Russian government has unleashed a crackdown on
civil society unprecedented in the country’s post-Soviet history. The
authorities have introduced a series of restrictive laws, harassed, intimidated,
and in several cases imprisoned political activists, interfered in the work of
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and sought to cast government critics as
clandestine enemies, thereby threatening the viability of Russia’s civil society.
Two
of the new laws – the “foreign agents” law and the “Dima
Yakovlev law” – clearly seek to limit, or even end,
independent advocacy and other NGO work by placing new, draconian limits on
association with foreigners and foreign funding.
The
“Dima Yakovlev law”
essentially bans funding emanating from the United
States for “political” NGO activity and bans NGOs whose
work is “directed against Russia’s
interests.”
The
treason law expands the legal definition of treason in ways that could
criminalize involvement in international human rights advocacy.
As these laws were being debated and adopted,
pro-government media outlets ran propaganda campaigns targeting prominent
nongovernmental groups, accusing them of promoting Western interests in
exchange for funding.
The “foreign agents” law expanded already
extensive and intrusive state control over organizations that receive foreign
funding by setting out additional reporting requirements and providing for
additional inspections by government bodies. It equates receiving any foreign
funding with being an agent of foreign interests.
The
term “foreign agent” in Russia
is ubiquitously understood as spy or traitor, and it is difficult to avoid the
impression that by adopting this law, Russian authorities sought to discredit
and demonize certain civil society groups that accept foreign funding.
The
treason law broadened the definition of treason by adding the provision of
“consultative or other assistance to a foreign state, an international or
foreign organization … in activities against the security of the Russian Federation”
to the list of actions that can constitute state treason. This new definition
leaves broad room for officials to arbitrarily interpret and selectively apply
it against individuals engaged in routine discussions with foreign counterparts
or presenting human rights reports at international conferences.
The
United Nations Committee Against Torture, for example,
said the law could be interpreted as prohibiting the sharing of information on
the human rights situation in the Russian Federation with the UN.
You
can see relevant
information of Human Rights Watch, UN bodies, interested
organizations at
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2013/04/24/laws-attrition
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/RUSession16.aspx
8. Economic, social and
cultural rights
140.197.
Adopt a national strategy integrating economic, social and cultural rights to
combat poverty (South Africa)
- partially accepted;
Russia's
position.
Combating poverty is one of the main thrusts of the
Russian authorities’ social and economic policy. However, it is the national
legislature that has the competence to select the most appropriate form of
regulation to combat poverty effectively (such as a national strategy, a plan
of action, a State programme, etc.).
Author's comment
According
to official state data, less than 20% of the Russian population has income
below the subsistence minimum.
But really the majority of
Russians live below poverty line because undervaluation of
minimum social standards, low real purchasing power of cash income, unreliability
of average statistical data, overestimating prices and tariffs.
Real information on the actual
socio-economic situation of Russia
will be presented to the UN bodies.
Absence
of conditions for a decent life not only leads to lower quality of life, but
also to elementary hunger and total poverty, consequence of which is physical
extinction of population.
It
is a result of unfair distribution of national income in Russia which is spent only to
ensuring good life officials and oligarchs.
Living
space in Russia
(profitable business, high-paying jobs, lucrative public contracts) is
distributed among officials and oligarchs, their relatives and friends.
In
these conditions it is impossible to create a comprehensive socially-oriented
state policy.
9. Rights
of ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples
140.219.
Ensure the right of indigenous people to their ancestral lands through the
implementation of the relevant legislation with measurable targets and
effective data collection (Hungary)
- accepted;
Russia's
position.
Legislation already gives small indigenous peoples
priority in the use of land and natural resources.
The
Federal Act on Territories of Traditional Resource Use of Small Indigenous
Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, the
policy framework for the sustainable development of small indigenous peoples
and a number of other laws and regulations have been adopted to protect those
peoples’ ancestral habitat and traditional ways of life and to preserve biological
diversity in territories of traditional resource use.
The
Land Code enshrines the right of indigenous peoples’ communities to use
agricultural land to preserve and develop their traditional ways of life,
livelihoods and crafts.
140.220.
Harmonize the various laws on the rights of indigenous peoples, particularly
regarding their access to land and natural resources (Mexico) - accepted;
140.221.
Strengthen federal and local legislation in favour of
the rights of indigenous peoples (Bolivia
(Plurinational
State of)) - accepted;
140.223.
Officially endorse the
United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and fully implement all relevant national
laws and regulations (Denmark)
- not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The Government’s policy on small indigenous peoples is
aimed at ensuring those peoples’ sustainable development and is based on
provisions of national legislation that are, to a large degree, identical to
the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples.
Russian
legislation and law enforcement practice in respect of the rights of indigenous
peoples and the preservation and development of their cultures goes
substantially further than the provisions of the Declaration, extending its
boundaries.
140.224.
Improve the precarious situation of indigenous peoples, particularly by
stepping up efforts to guarantee their right to education, including in their
own languages; unrestricted use of their lands and territories; address the
problem of underrepresentation in State institutions
at the federal and regional levels and follow other principles enshrined in the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Estonia) - partially accepted;
Russia's
position.
Approval of the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples – not accepted. See 140.223.
Guarantee
of the rights of indigenous peoples to education and the use of land resources
– accepted. See 140.219.
Representation
of indigenous people in the State institutions – accepted and already
implemented in practice. There are no laws or regulations that restrict the
rights of small indigenous peoples to occupy public positions. Indeed, the Russian Federation
provides supplementary guarantees of informed and meaningful participation by
representatives of indigenous peoples in decision-making.
140.225.
Increase its budget allocation for indigenous peoples (Namibia) - not accepted;
Russia's
position.
The authorities have already allocated substantial
funds to support the development of small indigenous peoples. A total of
approximately 12 billion roubles were allocated from
State budgets at various levels during the period 2009–2011. The amount
allocated in the future will be determined on the basis of need and the
financial possibilities of the respective budgets.
140.229.
Take action to stop the atrocities committed by some individuals against immigrants,
especially in Moscow (Chad) - accepted;
Author's comment
Russia presented false and untrue information.
Indigenous
peoples are still deprived of priority access to lands and natural resources,
and cannot influence activities of industrial enterprises, operating on their
traditional lands.
Russian
officials removed norms from legislation on free use of lands by indigenous
peoples.
Despite
the adoption of the Federal law «On territories of traditional nature use of
indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation»
there is not a single territory of traditional nature use.