"Fighting extremism" as it is
About the so-called "fight against extremism" now only some unintelligible Internet user has not heard. Recently, it has become a real trend in the domestic law enforcement agencies.
Given the fact that the concept of "extremism" is rather vague, it is easier to bring responsibility for it. Therefore, many such processes are in the nature of "political". And most of them are associated with the dissemination of information through the Internet.
')
First, the opposition communicates and agitates through the network, which is deprived of access to “normal” mass media like television and the press. Opposition parties and movements are, of course, one of the most frequent "targets" of such processes.
Secondly, everything said on the network remains in it. For an indefinite period of time. As you understand, this greatly simplifies the task of the “fighters”: you can even use the search for the most characteristic expressions. So under the rink of justice fall, in addition to the opposition, more and temperate teens.
At the end of August last year, when crossing the border of Abkhazia and Russia, journalist Alexei Ivashchenko underwent a customs inspection , during which 26 gigabytes of information was copied from his computer to the “blank” of customs officers. Customs officers studied personal correspondence, texts and photos stored on the hard disk of the laptop. Of course, all attempts to protest were stopped, and when asked about the reasons for such close attention, customs officers responded that they were “looking for illegal information”.
In January of this year, Ivaschenko tried to appeal against these actions, however, the court refused to recognize them as illegal. In his speech in court, the customs representative said that the customs officers allegedly have the right to such actions. As a basis for this, Presidential Decree No. 310 of March 23, 1995 was called “On Measures to Ensure Concerted Actions of State Authorities in Combating Fascism and Other Forms of Political Extremism”.
In this decree, indeed, some measures are envisaged to combat the ideas of national discord, but, as often happens, it does not contain any specifics, ordering “to strengthen supervision,” “strictly control”, and so on, “to expand” and “deepen”. There is also an order to the State Customs Committee "to detain and bring to the responsibility established by current legislation of persons distributing printed materials, films, photos, audio and video materials aimed at promoting fascism, inciting social, racial, national or religious discord" also “take measures to seize such printed materials and materials”. It is this indication, in the opinion of the Sochi customs officers, that gives them the right to pry into other people's computers: after all, there may be “strife-raging materials” there.
By the way, contrary to popular belief, no responsibility is provided for the ownership of such materials, even if they are included in the “extremist list”. Their mass distribution entails administrative liability under Article 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. However, very often people are held criminally liable for such a distribution under the notorious article 282 of the Criminal Code. Sometimes it seems that neither the police nor the prosecutor’s office simply know any other regulations in this area.
As for customs, it has a strictly defined field of activity specified in the Customs Code - this is customs regulation, which is “the establishment of procedures and rules, subject to which persons exercise the right to move goods and vehicles across the customs border of the Russian Federation”. A product is a thing intended for sale, so that those items that a person carries with him, or sends across the border, should not be addressed by customs officers in general. Except for the cases, their cost exceeds a certain amount, or there are so many of them that there is reason to suspect that a “commercial consignment” intended for sale is being transported (that is, again, “goods”).
The fact that the laptop contains personal data is a sufficient reason for not considering it as a “commodity”. And the information in it is not a thing at all, and, accordingly, is also not a “commodity”. So, in the foreign electronic devices that the owner carries across the border, customs officials have nothing to do. The decree just gave them a reason to “interfere in someone’s private life, as it were lawfully” (and this is a criminal offense, by the way).
However, in October, Ivaschenko appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, having passed all the necessary Russian judicial instances. Well, let's hope that the ECHR will say its weighty word in this matter.
The article already mentioned the " extremist list ." This document, which is kept by the Ministry of Justice, inserts in it those materials that were recognized as “extremist” decisions of Russian courts. Since there are many vessels in Russia and they do not coordinate their activities, there are several dozens of materials with the same name in the “list” - perhaps these are the same books and articles re-inscribed in it. In addition, the titles of books may coincide, that is, a single title for identification is clearly not enough.
But when the courts intrude into the computer sphere, confusion and vacillation generally begin. Periodically, waves of “reposts” about particularly outstanding materials listed in the “list”, such as “files: 13ng.jpg; 14s.jpg; 15ng.jpg »and the like. In such illustrative examples, we can easily see the problems with the description of materials that our courts have. But when a court prohibits not a specific material, but the site on which it is located, then, in its decision, it does not identify any materials deemed extremist at all, but in fact prohibits a specific Internet address. There are about a dozen of such sites in the “list”, and there will probably be even more.
And such bans are already contrary to the law. The Federal Law “On Countering Extremist Activities” defines extremist materials as “documents intended for public disclosure or information on other media, calling for extremist activities or justifying or justifying the need to carry out such activities, including the works of the leaders of the German National Socialist Party, the fascist parties of Italy, publications justifying or justifying national and / or racial superiority or including the practice of committing military or other crimes aimed at the complete or partial destruction of any ethnic, social, racial, national or religious group. "
In accordance with the first article of the Federal Law “On Information, Information Technologies and Protection of Information”, “information” is “information (messages, data) regardless of the form in which they are presented,” and a document is “recorded on a tangible medium by documenting information from details, allowing to determine such information or in cases established by the legislation of the Russian Federation its material carrier ". However, if a site is banned entirely, a domain name that is neither a “document” nor a “information” is actually prohibited.
Article 1484 of the Civil Code implies that it is a “way of addressing”. In fact, a domain is a service that can be used at different times by different people. And the law “On Countering Extremist Activities” does not prohibit the use of the service, even if the author of extremist materials used it to address them before.
In general, as practice shows, domestic law enforcement agencies were not ready to meet with the fascinating computer world.
Given the fact that the concept of "extremism" is rather vague, it is easier to bring responsibility for it. Therefore, many such processes are in the nature of "political". And most of them are associated with the dissemination of information through the Internet.
There are several objective reasons for this.
')
First, the opposition communicates and agitates through the network, which is deprived of access to “normal” mass media like television and the press. Opposition parties and movements are, of course, one of the most frequent "targets" of such processes.
Secondly, everything said on the network remains in it. For an indefinite period of time. As you understand, this greatly simplifies the task of the “fighters”: you can even use the search for the most characteristic expressions. So under the rink of justice fall, in addition to the opposition, more and temperate teens.
Customs takes good
At the end of August last year, when crossing the border of Abkhazia and Russia, journalist Alexei Ivashchenko underwent a customs inspection , during which 26 gigabytes of information was copied from his computer to the “blank” of customs officers. Customs officers studied personal correspondence, texts and photos stored on the hard disk of the laptop. Of course, all attempts to protest were stopped, and when asked about the reasons for such close attention, customs officers responded that they were “looking for illegal information”.
In January of this year, Ivaschenko tried to appeal against these actions, however, the court refused to recognize them as illegal. In his speech in court, the customs representative said that the customs officers allegedly have the right to such actions. As a basis for this, Presidential Decree No. 310 of March 23, 1995 was called “On Measures to Ensure Concerted Actions of State Authorities in Combating Fascism and Other Forms of Political Extremism”.
In this decree, indeed, some measures are envisaged to combat the ideas of national discord, but, as often happens, it does not contain any specifics, ordering “to strengthen supervision,” “strictly control”, and so on, “to expand” and “deepen”. There is also an order to the State Customs Committee "to detain and bring to the responsibility established by current legislation of persons distributing printed materials, films, photos, audio and video materials aimed at promoting fascism, inciting social, racial, national or religious discord" also “take measures to seize such printed materials and materials”. It is this indication, in the opinion of the Sochi customs officers, that gives them the right to pry into other people's computers: after all, there may be “strife-raging materials” there.
By the way, contrary to popular belief, no responsibility is provided for the ownership of such materials, even if they are included in the “extremist list”. Their mass distribution entails administrative liability under Article 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. However, very often people are held criminally liable for such a distribution under the notorious article 282 of the Criminal Code. Sometimes it seems that neither the police nor the prosecutor’s office simply know any other regulations in this area.
As for customs, it has a strictly defined field of activity specified in the Customs Code - this is customs regulation, which is “the establishment of procedures and rules, subject to which persons exercise the right to move goods and vehicles across the customs border of the Russian Federation”. A product is a thing intended for sale, so that those items that a person carries with him, or sends across the border, should not be addressed by customs officers in general. Except for the cases, their cost exceeds a certain amount, or there are so many of them that there is reason to suspect that a “commercial consignment” intended for sale is being transported (that is, again, “goods”).
The fact that the laptop contains personal data is a sufficient reason for not considering it as a “commodity”. And the information in it is not a thing at all, and, accordingly, is also not a “commodity”. So, in the foreign electronic devices that the owner carries across the border, customs officials have nothing to do. The decree just gave them a reason to “interfere in someone’s private life, as it were lawfully” (and this is a criminal offense, by the way).
However, in October, Ivaschenko appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, having passed all the necessary Russian judicial instances. Well, let's hope that the ECHR will say its weighty word in this matter.
Ban all wholesale
The article already mentioned the " extremist list ." This document, which is kept by the Ministry of Justice, inserts in it those materials that were recognized as “extremist” decisions of Russian courts. Since there are many vessels in Russia and they do not coordinate their activities, there are several dozens of materials with the same name in the “list” - perhaps these are the same books and articles re-inscribed in it. In addition, the titles of books may coincide, that is, a single title for identification is clearly not enough.
But when the courts intrude into the computer sphere, confusion and vacillation generally begin. Periodically, waves of “reposts” about particularly outstanding materials listed in the “list”, such as “files: 13ng.jpg; 14s.jpg; 15ng.jpg »and the like. In such illustrative examples, we can easily see the problems with the description of materials that our courts have. But when a court prohibits not a specific material, but the site on which it is located, then, in its decision, it does not identify any materials deemed extremist at all, but in fact prohibits a specific Internet address. There are about a dozen of such sites in the “list”, and there will probably be even more.
And such bans are already contrary to the law. The Federal Law “On Countering Extremist Activities” defines extremist materials as “documents intended for public disclosure or information on other media, calling for extremist activities or justifying or justifying the need to carry out such activities, including the works of the leaders of the German National Socialist Party, the fascist parties of Italy, publications justifying or justifying national and / or racial superiority or including the practice of committing military or other crimes aimed at the complete or partial destruction of any ethnic, social, racial, national or religious group. "
In accordance with the first article of the Federal Law “On Information, Information Technologies and Protection of Information”, “information” is “information (messages, data) regardless of the form in which they are presented,” and a document is “recorded on a tangible medium by documenting information from details, allowing to determine such information or in cases established by the legislation of the Russian Federation its material carrier ". However, if a site is banned entirely, a domain name that is neither a “document” nor a “information” is actually prohibited.
Article 1484 of the Civil Code implies that it is a “way of addressing”. In fact, a domain is a service that can be used at different times by different people. And the law “On Countering Extremist Activities” does not prohibit the use of the service, even if the author of extremist materials used it to address them before.
In general, as practice shows, domestic law enforcement agencies were not ready to meet with the fascinating computer world.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/107512/
All Articles