ADC “Memorial” officially declared a “foreign agent” by the court

Today, the court unexpectedly established that all the activitiesof ADC “Memorial” fall under the definition of “performing the functions of aforeign agent”. Accordingly, for the first time, a court has directly labelleda human rights NGO a “foreign agent”, and did not just order it to register assuch. This decision could pave the way to increased harassment of human rightsorganisations in the Russian Federation.

“This decision is evidence of the judicial harassment of ADC“Memorial”, and it is clear that the judge and the prosecutor are implementingpolitical orders from above” said FIDH Vice-President TolekanIsmailova, who observed today's hearing in the framework of an internationaljudicial observation mission for the Observatory. “It was just anappalling court hearing, marked by injustice and discrimination. The courtsatisfied all the demands of the prosecutor and rejected all the petitions ofthe lawyers of ADC “Memorial””, she added.

ADC “Memorial” was taken to courts over a report entitled “Roma,migrants, activists: victims of police abuse” submitted back in November 2012to the UN Committee Against Torture (CAT). According to the prosecutor, thisreport proves ADC's involvement in political activities and its function as a“foreign agent” as it allegedly received foreign funding. This case wasrejected by the administrative court, which found that the complaint of theprosecutor was unfounded. In July 2013 the prosecutor started another, civil,process “on behalf of an 'undefined group of citizens'” that, according to theprosecutor, would be protected by ADC's registration as a ”foreign agent”.

Surprisingly, at today's hearing, the prosecutor stated that ADC“Memorial” was guilty because of all its activities, and not just the report.He argued that the report was in fact inseparable from all other past andfuture activities of ADC, which are allegedly of “political” nature and wouldsupposedly tarnish the image of the police and the army. The prosecutor hadused the same reasoning in his protest regarding a decision favourable to ADC“Memorial” in the administrative process (see below).

“ADC “Memorial” is a legitimate human rights NGO, which, like anyother NGO, should be protected rather than criminalised. This decision amountsto an intolerable presumption of guilt for ADC “Memorial” and its activities”,FIDH President Karim Lahidji deplored.

“We call upon the Russianauthorities to repeal that verdict and to put an end to this escalatingharassment of NGOs. Ultimately, human rights are inthe national interest of any democratic State”, said OMCT Secretary General Gerald Staberock.

The hearing was observed by representatives from the European Union,Belgium, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland and Lithuania.

The verdict shall be notified to ADC “Memorial” within five days, andADC will have one month to appeal the decision.

Background information

Following the introduction of the law on 'foreign agent' in spring 2013,hundreds of NGOs have been inspected by prosecutors. These inspections resultedin further unprecedented harassment: as of December 2013 two NGOs have beensuspended, at least 11 have been taken to court, and dozens have receivedofficial notices of violations or warnings not to violate the law.

ADC “Memorial” has been facing two cases: administrative and civil. Inboth cases the prosecutor argues that ADC Memorial is a foreign agent as inNovember 2012 it submitted a report to the CAT entitled “Roma, migrants,activists: victims of police abuse”.

The civil case is based on Article 45, part 1 of the Code on CivilProcedure, which allows the prosecutor to turn to the court on behalf of an“unspecified group of citizens”. The prosecutor argues that by failing toregister as a “foreign agent”, ADC “Memorial” broke the law and continues tomislead this “unspecified group” about its activities.

The administrative case against ADC “Memorial” was lodged by theprosecutor in April 2013 and was rejected in May 2013 by the Mirovoy Court no.8 of St Petersburg. The court found that the evidence brought by theprosecutor’s office was inconclusive and insufficient to prove that the ADCMemorial was a “foreign agent”. All the appeals and “protests”[2] ofthe prosecutor were likewise rejected. The court stipulated that there were nolegal grounds for the very inspection of ADC Memorial's premises in the springof 2013.

In Russia, administrative processes can only concern offences committedwithin the past three months, so the case of ADC “Memorial” is already longexpired. Despite this, on November 5, 2013, the prosecutor lodged a new“protest” to the City Court of SaintPetersburg, where he demands that the court cancel the decision of the DistrictCourt. In this protest he went beyond the report submitted to the CAT and claimed that “due tothe constant nature of the activities of ADC “Memorial”, it can be concludedthat the offence it committed has a lasting character” and is “inseparable fromall other types of its activities”.

For more information,please contact:

· FIDH: Arthur Manet/Audey Couprie: + 33 (0) 1 43 55 25 18

· OMCT: Delphine Reculeau: + 41 (0) 22 809 49 39

[1] A joint programme ofthe International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World OrganisationAgainst Torture (OMCT).

[2] A "protest" is another wayin which a prosecutor can appeal decisions, including decisions of courts inadministrative cases.