Andrey Vasilev, the general director of the Publishing House Kommersant.
Photo: Valery Levitin
| Other Photos |
 |
|
 |
Kommersant Answered For “Blood” of Aslan Maskhadov
// Arbitrage Defended Supervisors from Journalists
Yesterday Arbitrage Court of Moscow examined a suit filed by the Publishing House Kommersant against Federal Service of Legal Supervision in Mass Communications and Protection of Cultural Heritage (Rosokhrankultura) for recognition of false warning that was given to the Kommersant editorial board on Feb. 9, 2005, for publication of an interview with Chechen separatist leader Aslan Maskhadov. The interview was published on Feb. 7, 2005. After hearing the both sides, Judge Irina Blinnikova deliberated for seven minutes before denying Kommersant’s petition.
Let’s remind, that information about Rosokhrankultura warning to Kommersant appeared in Interfax Web site on Feb. 9. Then on the site of the Federal Agency of Media and Mass Communications showed up a commentary from an anonymous representative of Rosokhrankultura. “Rosokhrankultura, which was acting within its powers, gave official warning to the editorial board of Kommersant newspaper about prohibiting to break the law of the Russian Federation,” underlined anonymous representative of service and recited the broken laws. “The parts of Article IV of the law About Mass Media and Article XI of the law About Prevention of Extremist Activities which forbade the use of mass media for extremist activities and also distribution through the media of materials that justify such activities.”
The warning by itself signed by Boris Boyarskov, head of Rosokhrankultura, came in the evening of Feb. 22. Kommersant announced right away (see issue from Feb. 24) that it will protest this warning in the court as unlawful. In the preliminary court session held April 12, representatives of Rosokhrankultura familiarized Judge Blinnikova with “conclusion of examination of the interview text with Maskhadov” which was signed by Alexander Ushakov, head of the department of World Literature Institute. This examination was the basis for the issued warning.
In his conclusion of the examination Professor Ushakov referred to two dictionaries, (the Foreign Word Thesarus, M 2000, and Modern Dictionary of Foreign Words, M 1992). From those books, the professor found out that the word extremism means expression of extreme views. But he obviously did not suspect that in the law the word extremism is defined in a totally different way. But, the expert of Rosokhrankultura did not care much about the terminology. In his opinion, “the main idea why this interview was published is in Maskhadov’s answers to the newspaper’s question, ‘What’s going to happen after the end of the ceasefire?’” The separatist leader answered, “If sober minds of our Kremlin opponents will prevail, then we will finish the war at the negotiation table. If not, then most likely would be spilled for a long time. But we will not carry a moral responsibility for continuation of this madness.”
According to Ushakov’s conclusion, “Maskhadov uses in his speech emotionally painted, stable linguistic construction, ‘the blood will be spilled,’ meaning the killings would be continued.” In this expression in the view of the Rosokhrankultura scientific expert, Maskhadov “expresses far-reaching extremist position,” “and he provides the foundation and justifies the possibility of the far-reaching extreme measures application such as killing and terror (“blood will be spilled for a long time”)”. In the end of his scientific research, Ushakov says “It is necessary to note that Kommersant’s editorial board by publishing not-quite regular article did not show its position toward the subject, did not comment on it, leaving for the readers an opportunity to consider the newspaper’s position as an agreement with everything that was said by Maskhadov.”
But Kommersant doesn’t have to suggest, and never suggested, its view for the reader. The newspaper always preferred to give word to the direct participants of the described events. And in case of Maskhadov, in the lead of the interview, there was a referral note to page 3 of the same issue. There the president of Chechnya Alu Alkhanov was commenting on the words of the Ichkeria leader. Also, there were comments of the members of the counter-terrorism regional operational staff in the North Caucuses. However, neither Ushakov nor Boyarskov noticed that. The head of the Kommersant law department Georgi Ivanov told Judge Blinnikova about it in yesterday’s court session. He also asked the court when making its verdict to consider norms of the law, but not the misunderstanding of the articles by the Rosokhrankultura expert. “The warning is illegal,” Ivanov told the court, “because in an interview there are no justifications, not only terrorists or extremists activities but any other activity as well. There is not a single word in the interview about justifying somebody’s cause or demand for action.” These words were supported by linguistic analysis of Maskhadov’s interview made by the Vinogradov Institute of Russian Language. The senior scientific researcher of the institute Irina Levontina when making this analysis came to the conclusion that “continuation of blood shedding is evaluated by subject of interview in analyzed fragment of the test negatively—as a mad, as a crazy action for which somebody has to carry a moral responsibility. And finishing of the war at the negotiation table the interviewee evaluates as use of a sober mind.”
Judge Blinnikova asked where Kommersant exactly sees the attack on its rights. “The existence of not denied warning creates opportunity for the defendant in the case of issuing a second warning to file a petition about cancellation of the mass media registration,” responded Kommersant representative Dmitry Zharkov. “And that creates a threat to Kommersant to conduct business of publishing a newspaper.”
The defendant’s representatives in the court, Marat Badaksheev and Nikolai Novikov, told the judge that they still share scientific conclusions and a civil position of their expert. “Whose blood did Maskhadov mean?” exclained Badaksheev.”No, please tell me. What is human blood or not?” Here even Judge Blinnikova who was reading some kind of paper and printing something in a notebook PC raised her head and allowed plaintiff not to respond to Badaksheev’s question.
It took only seven minutes for the judge to come up with a verdict. When the defendant and plaintiff were invited into the judge’s chambers, Blinnikova’s desk was in full order: the paper’s disappeared, the notebook PC lid was closed (this was the last scheduled hearing for the judge). She announced the resolution part of her verdict. Kommersant is to be denied in its filing. The motivational part of the decision the judge will announce on April 26. The representatives of Rosokhrankultura, while running to the elevator from the reporters who were waiting for them in the hallway, briefly screamed to the Kommersant correspondent that they are “satisfied with the court’s decision.” And Ivanov announced that Kommersant Publishing House most likely will appeal to a higher court as soon as it learns the motivational part of Judge Blinnikova’s ruling.
Sergei Petukhov
All the Article in Russian as of Apr. 20, 2005
|
|
|
