The Litvinenko Inquiry

Part 5 | Chapters 1 to 8 | Alexander Litvinenko’s final months
Seizure or arrogation of [governmental] authority;
Creation of illegal armed formations;
Conduct of terrorist activity or the public justification of terrorism;
Excitation of racist, national or religious strife (roznya) as well as social strife
accompanied by force or calls for the use of force;
Insulting (unizhenie) national dignity;
Realisation of mass disorders, hooligan actions and acts of vandalism with
motives of ideological, political, racial, national or religious hostility or hatred,
as well as that motivated by hatred or enmity toward some social group;
Propaganda of the exceptionalism, superiority or inferiority of citizens on the
basis of their attitude towards religion, social, racial, national, religious or
linguistic affiliation;
Obstruction of the legal activity of organs of state power and election
commissions, as well as the lawful activities of the officials of such organs and
commissions;
Public slander of anyone filling a state post of the Russian Federation or a state
office of a constituent region of the Russian Federation during the exercise
of his official duties or in connection with their exercise, accompanied by an
accusation that the person has committed acts identified in this article, on the
condition that such slander has been established in court proceedings;
…
(b) …
Production and (or) dissemination of printed, audio, audio-visual and other
materials for public use that contain even one of the above-mentioned features;
(c) Public appeals to engage in such activity, as well as public calls and addresses
encouraging engagement in such activity and supporting or justifyng the commission
of acts identified in this article;
(d) Financing such activities or any co-operation in planning, organisation,
preparation and implementation of such actions, including by means of providing
funds, immovable property, educational, printing material and technical support,
telephone, fax or other means of communication, informational services or other
material and technical means.”
5.8 Professor Service commented on this provision in trenchant terms. He said:
“The amendment is a mere listing of categories rather than a careful legislative
definition. The language is extravagantly vague, and more than one category allows
for unfettered repressive activity by the authorities. The item on the slandering of
holders of public office is remarkable for the room it gives to treat any strident
critique of the President or other leading officials as extremism. The wording is
so expansive as to enable the authorities, if such were to be their desire, to act
87