Thursday, April 17, 2014
Exit from comment view mode. Click to hide this space

Putin’s Law

FLORENCE – Russian President Vladimir Putin is showing increasing disdain for international law – a stance that is perhaps nowhere clearer than in his government’s continuing military support for Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. But, in view of Putin’s authoritarian rule at home, his perception of international law as little more than an instrument of foreign policy should come as no surprise.

When Putin’s regime wants to stamp out opposition, it typically deploys exotic and improbable provisions of Russia’s criminal code. For example, the young female performers in the punk band Pussy Riot, who dared to sing derogatory songs about Putin in an Orthodox church, were charged with “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred” and received two years in prison.

Similarly, opposition politician and lawyer Alexei Navalny was convicted for having given poor legal advice to a provincial timber company that caused the company to lose money – a “crime” that carried a five-year prison sentence. Fortunately, the authorities suspended the sentence following mass protests in Moscow by Navalny’s supporters; but the conviction remains on the books – and has hampered further political activism.

Politically motivated trials started to increase ten years ago with the imprisonment of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who was head of Yukos, Russia’s largest privately owned oil company, after he ignored warnings not to support Putin’s opponents. Since then, there have been hundreds of politically motivated arrests and excessive sentences. Most recently, the authorities declared a peaceful anti-government protest by a score of young Muscovites a riot, despite a live Internet broadcast showing no unrest, and no reports by witnesses of any disorder. But several protesters are now in prison or in psychiatric hospitals.

Putin’s intolerance of dissent is becoming ever more sinister. He was deeply offended by the negative reaction on the streets and in the press following his controversial election in 2012 to a third presidential term, accusing the opposition and the West of trying to undermine him. Whether this response reflects personal pettiness or the uncompromising outlook of a former KGB officer, his hostility toward the West, especially the United States, is disturbing.

At the beginning of this year, Putin demonstrated the depths to which he will sink to punish perceived opponents. After the US adopted a law aimed at sanctioning Russian officials responsible for alleged human-rights violations, Putin’s government banned American families from adopting Russian orphans, thousands of whom find happy homes in the US every year. Hundreds of children, many disabled, had already met their prospective parents and were preparing for a new life when the ban was imposed; they were told that their would-be parents had changed their minds. Families from other countries whose governments hold unfavorable views of Russian policies have also been banned. Meanwhile, 75,000 Russian children fester in squalid children’s homes.

Every year, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) receives 10,000-14,000 complaints from Russia, the highest number in Europe. Some result in annulment of unfair sentences and compensation for victims (though Russia seldom compensates Chechens who have suffered at the hands of the Russian military).

Until now, Moscow has generally respected ECHR rulings. But, on October 23, the Russian Supreme Court for the first time officially rejected an ECHR decision, in a case concerning Alexei Pichugin, a former deputy to Khodorkovsky and head of Yukos’s security service, who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for fraud. The ECHR called for Pichugin’s sentence to be reduced and for Russia’s government to compensate him for “moral damage.”

But this was not the only case of Russia turning its back on its international commitments. The foreign ministry has announced that Russia will not comply with the decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in a lawsuit brought by the owners of a ship used by the environmental group Greenpeace.

The lawsuit stemmed from an incident in September, when Greenpeace activists, as part of the group’s global “Save the Arctic” campaign, tried to place a protest poster on Russia’s Prirazlomnaya oil platform. They were arrested by Russian border guards and imprisoned in Murmansk, and their ship, the Dutch-owned Arctic Sunrise, was also seized. Its American captain, Peter Willcox, and his international crew were searched and charged with piracy – a crime that carries a sentence of up to 15 years imprisonment and confiscation of property.

The Russian foreign ministry’s explanation for ignoring the tribunal’s ruling was as ominous as it was perplexing: Russia, the ministry declared, does not recognize the tribunal. But the tribunal was established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which 166 countries, including Russia, are party. Indeed, Russia has appealed to the tribunal, and won cases, in disputes involving its own ships.

It would appear that it is Russia that is at sea. The Putin government’s increasing tendency to exempt itself from the international rule of law is dangerous for the world, but it is likely to prove more dangerous for Russia.

Read more from "Putin's Risky Games"

Exit from comment view mode. Click to hide this space
Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (6)

Please login or register to post a comment

  1. CommentedEddy Qui

    You are right with this part. But with the Smith-Mundt Act the USA can legally show propaganda in TV's. Isn't that dangerous for the world?

  2. CommentedEddy Qui

    Project-Syndicate is a site where different people from different countrys write about different things happening in the world. All articles should be objective. Missing to stand out the point that Khodorkosvky is a tax fraudster in Russia, you sir only described the western perspective on this case.

  3. CommentedEddy Qui

    I don't know where you get the information about the military support for al-Assad. Germany also sold military vehicles this year to non-democractic countrys, nobody blames them? Because its a legitimate political and economical behaviour.

  4. Commentedtemesgen abate

    why Putin nibbles at international law except in mimicking his alter ego, the former G. Bush in his renditions and Abughraibs?the former president paved the road of flaunting such.he jested ``either against us or with us`` .then gestated was this Russian misanthrope.

  5. CommentedPatrick Lietz

    While the author makes some valid remarks concerning the development in Russia concerning the rather selective application of the rule of law, the article is decidedly one-sided.

    Russia's history shows clearly that the country has no democratic tradition, and the chaotic breakdown of governmental and societal structures after the dissolution of the Soviet Union further lessens its appeal to the Russian populace and its elites.

    In addition, Russia's increasing hostility towards the West may be problematic for us, but may be based on a host of legitimate grievances.

    The West broke the agreement of not expanding NATO into former soviet states (e.g. Poland). The West used the dissolution of the Soviet Union to grab Russian resources and companies for Pennies on the Dollar, and rebuffed Russian ouvertures to be admitted into the collectives of the West such as NATO . It is also the US that installed the missile shield in former Soviet states against the strongest objections from Russia, which sees it as a genuine threat to its national security.

    Thus, Andrei Malgin's article makes some valid points but fails to include some vital context without which its contribution becomes marginal at best, and detrimental at worst as it entrenches ignorance and prejudiced perceptions.

    1. CommentedIvan Yu

      there was no such agreement. it was a promise - totally different thing.
      and hostility towards the West has nothing to do with rational reasons. it's purely unconscious, irrational.

  6. CommentedLeo Arouet

    Rusia sigue siendo un país en dictadura... no es el totalitarismo de antes, pero su rechazo de las normas es deplorable. Encarcela a los opositores, y existe una corrupción tan grande como la de China.