10 November 2014
Source: HRO.org (info)
Memorial Human Rights Centre, the International Memorial Society, Civic Assistance Committee and the individual S.A. Gannushkina have taken issue with alleged violations the provisions of Article 21 (Point 2) and Article 22 (Point 1) of the law, while Agora Human Rights Association has taken issue with Article 6 (Point 1), Article 21 (Point 2) and Article 22 (Point 1) of the same law.
As RAPSI (Russian Legal Information Agency) reports, the applicants assert that the contested provisions of Article 21 (Point 2) and Article 22 (Point 1) of the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation” do not comply with the formal requirements of law in that they do not provide an exact list of grounds for an inspection by the Prosecutor’s Office, do not define the rights of individuals being inspected, or the structure of the inspecting committee and only arbitrarily define the objectives of such inspections. They therefore disproportionately limit the right to freedom of assembly and association.
In the spring of 2013 the Moscow Prosecutor’s Office inspected the organisations which have now lodged these complaints. Notifications of the inspections were received by the organisations only at the start of each inspection and consisted of a generalised formulation that the inspections were being conducted “on the subject of compliance with current legislation by non-governmental and religious associations and other non-profit organisations.”
The prosecutors required the provision of copies of statutory and financial documents and documents about the activities of the organisations. All told, the applicants had to provide several thousand pages of copies of documents.
Nikolai Bondar has been appointed as the reporting judge in the case. The date of the public proceedings has not yet been fixed. Read more: http://rapsinews.ru/judicial_news/20141110/272544971.html#ixzz3IgAouLTy (in Russian).
Translated by Georgia Forth
HRO.org in English >