Alexei Navalny said that he considers his house arrest unlawful because, he argues, this preventive measure can no longer be applied after a verdict has been handed down, and because he was not provided with the text of the verdict within the legally prescribed time frame. He said he had removed his electronic ankle monitor and did not intend to comply with the restrictions, explaining that this was not a political act but rather adherence to criminal procedure law and a defense of his basic rights. At the same time, Navalny acknowledged that the authorities might respond with new restrictions or procedural decisions, but stressed that he intended to continue his work and his public and political activities as usual.
Text version
0:00
after the verdict was handed down, as Navalny writes
0:02
the legally required deadline for
0:04
providing him with the text of the verdict, and
0:05
he still has not been given anything.
0:07
Therefore, he considers his house arrest
0:09
illegal and does not intend to comply with
0:11
its terms. On his blog, the politician
0:13
published a photo of the monitoring
0:14
ankle bracelet, which he cut off with a kitchen
0:17
knife. Meanwhile, FSIN officers have already been sent to
0:19
Navalny; the agency says an inspector is on the way to him.
0:21
It says it will go to court if
0:22
the information published by the politician
0:24
is confirmed. We will learn all the details from
0:26
Alexei Navalny himself — he is joining us live
0:27
from our studio. Alexei, good
0:30
good afternoon — good evening. Can you hear
0:32
the TV Rain studio? Good evening, I can hear you.
0:33
Excellent. We understand that someone is now on the way to you —
0:36
an FSIN officer. Has he arrived yet or not?
0:38
And what do you expect from his visit? What do you
0:41
think will happen when he
0:43
arrives? I don’t know what will happen
0:45
when he arrives. He called me about
0:46
10 minutes ago and asked what he should
0:48
tell his superiors. Well, I said:
0:50
Tell your superiors that I do not intend
0:53
to comply with an illegal house arrest.
0:55
You just said that opposition figure
0:57
Alexei Navalny considers his house
0:59
arrest illegal. This is not just opposition figure Alexei
1:02
Navalny who considers the arrest illegal — rather,
1:04
the Criminal Procedure Code directly
1:06
states that it is impossible to keep someone under
1:08
house arrest after
1:10
a verdict has been handed down. House arrest is
1:12
either for suspects or for
1:14
the accused, and I have already been sentenced.
1:16
Yes, and on your blog you even linked to
1:18
the provisions that say that within
1:20
5 days the verdict must be provided, and you
1:22
still have not received it. Could you
1:24
explain in more detail why you decided to
1:27
act this way? Why did you decide to remove the bracelet
1:29
without waiting for some kind of, well, I don’t know,
1:30
official court ruling or an FSIN decision
1:33
stating that you had been released from
1:35
house arrest? Well, I was waiting for it — I was waiting for the verdict
1:38
so I could receive it and see what to do with it,
1:40
to file an appeal. Everyone keeps asking me
1:42
when I am going to file
1:43
the appeal, but I cannot file it
1:45
because they are not giving me the verdict
1:47
in writing. It is an absurd and outrageous system. Perhaps
1:49
for non-lawyers it is not entirely clear why
1:52
I am so outraged, but this is an absolute
1:53
nonsense: a person is effectively deprived of freedom.
1:56
Not to mention my brother, who is in
1:58
pretrial detention (SIZO) without a verdict. In general, in a SIZO
2:01
they do not hold people without a verdict, so I
2:03
waited the five days during which they were supposed to give me
2:04
the verdict, after which I am acting fully in accordance with
2:07
the Criminal Procedure Code. And are there still
2:09
police officers stationed at your building entrance?
2:11
Because we
2:13
saw all the photos that were
2:14
posted after you first
2:16
violated the terms of your house
2:18
arrest and went to Manezhnaya Square.
2:20
Or is there no one there now? Well, in that
2:22
comical situation where on my landing
2:24
there were four large
2:26
policemen standing there, not even understanding themselves why
2:28
they were there — of course they are not there now. Maybe
2:30
someone is on duty near the entrance; I
2:32
have no idea. Are you now, so to speak,
2:35
deliberately escalating the situation,
2:38
trying to draw attention to yourself
2:41
as a politician and public
2:42
figure? And for what purpose are you doing
2:45
this? Well, first of all, I do not
2:48
agree with you — that is not the case at all. I am not
2:50
escalating anything. What do you mean, escalating?
2:51
I am simply following what is
2:53
written in the Criminal Procedure
2:55
Code. They are the ones escalating the situation,
2:56
because what is happening to me
2:59
right now is unlawful deprivation of liberty.
3:02
Even if we assume that the verdict
3:04
that was handed down has any
3:05
relation at all to justice — that is,
3:07
this is outright unlawful deprivation
3:09
of liberty. And when I am detained without
3:12
drawing up a detention report, taken
3:13
home, and then, for some unclear reason, there is
3:15
police standing here, and so on and so forth. And
3:17
Moskvoretsky Court itself told FSIN
3:20
that they cannot consider anything
3:22
because Navalny’s situation is no longer
3:23
governed by the Criminal Procedure
3:26
Code. This is a violation of the law, so I am
3:27
not drawing any attention to myself — I am
3:29
simply
3:30
taking off a bracelet that, by law, should not
3:33
be on me, and exercising
3:34
the normal rights of a person and a citizen.
3:36
What, is simply leaving the house and going to
3:39
work, or just leaving the house
3:40
to walk in the yard with my children, somehow drawing
3:42
attention to myself? I draw exactly as much attention to myself
3:45
as
3:46
is needed to spend time with my children and go to the office.
3:50
As you wrote on your blog — or, I don’t
3:52
know, make some kind of statements
3:55
or calls for some new
3:59
actions?
4:01
Well,
4:02
in any case, I will make whatever statements
4:05
I need to make. I am going to do exactly what I did before:
4:07
go to work, work on
4:09
my Anti-Corruption Foundation,
4:10
work on building the Party of
4:11
Progress, and make political
4:13
statements at the moments when I believe
4:15
political statements need to be
4:16
made.
4:18
Of course, in some cases I am a witness,
4:22
in others... What kind of reaction do you think this will provoke?
4:24
there will be pressure from the authorities on your side
4:29
won't the term of house arrest
4:31
be sped up, for example, the investigation in that case
4:34
of the same matter, or say reclassify
4:36
your status in the case involving the theft
4:42
of the painting? I do not rule it out, in order to
4:44
hamper my activities, so I do not
4:46
rule out new charges, and then there could be a new
4:48
court ruling in another case. Could you also end up under
4:50
house arrest or somewhere else? I certainly do not
4:52
rule that out, but trying to predict what
4:54
they are going to do makes absolutely no
4:56
sense, because we keep trying
4:58
to predict some of their
4:59
legal steps, when we should be looking at
5:01
the political situation as a whole. These people
5:03
are perfectly comfortable with the idea
5:06
that they must either
5:08
intimidate their opponents—everyone must keep quiet—and those
5:10
who are not afraid must be shoved
5:12
somewhere under house arrest or into custody
5:14
and have their means, communication,
5:16
internet access, and so on blocked. So overall
5:19
of course I do not expect anything different, except
5:21
I do not know in what form exactly right now. And what am I doing
5:23
right now? Take note: not only
5:25
with us—well, not only with us. Well,
5:28
I am, naturally, once again, not
5:30
going to do anything
5:31
extraordinary. I am going to do what
5:33
the law allows one to do
5:35
what any normal person is legally entitled to do, including
5:37
speaking with journalists, to your
5:39
brother, colleague Navalny, who
5:40
is currently in a pretrial detention center (SIZO), somehow
5:42
getting in touch with him, perhaps trying to see him. Well,
5:44
I absolutely do not rule out that I myself could
5:46
end up in a SIZO as well. As for Oleg,
5:50
who is currently being held in Butyrka (a Moscow detention prison),
5:52
if I remember correctly, his wife
5:54
of course. Therefore I am not going
5:56
to use up this quota for visits, because right now in
6:01
Butyrka it's effectively the New Year holiday period, so he cannot even
6:04
receive letters. Starting from January 12, it will be possible
6:06
to write to him again, and that is how
6:07
I will communicate with him. And as for
6:09
visits, of course his wife will be the one to go
6:11
see him. Today, according to him, he did not
6:14
violate the law in any way, because
6:16
the verdict was still not provided to us within five days
6:22
as required.