Memorial Vindicated, Again
By Sean at 31 March, 2009, 9:31 am
When the St. Petersburg office of Memorial was raided in December last year, the international media was aghast. Article after article saw the confiscation of Memorial’s database of archival materials and interviews of life under Stalin as proof that Stalinism was back in full force. Why else would police bother to raid the human rights organization, they reasoned, if not to silence their voices of anti-Stalinism?
The exact reasons why Memorial was put through this ordeal remain murky. The official explanation is that the organization was somehow affiliated with Novyi Peterburg, which was under investigation for extremism. Others opined that the raid was connected to Memorial’s screening of Rebellion: the Livinenko Case. Still others maintain that the raid was part of a larger battle over Russia’s past, in particular the memory of the Stalin period.
While much ink was spilled on speculating why Memorial was raided, and its implications in regard to the memory of Stalinism, the English language press has been virtually silent in pointing out that the human rights organization won two cases in court that rebuffed investigators” search. The fist ruling came in January, when the Dzerzhinsky court ruled that investigators’ raid was illegal because they didn’t allow Memorial’s lawyer to be present. The police, however, appealed and the case went back to court.
But then last week, the Dzerzhinsky court again ruled in Memorial’s favor. As for the return of the hard disks and archival materials, the organization received a letter from St. Petersburg’s human rights ombudsman saying that their materials have already been removed from the investigators office and will soon be returned.
One would think that this victory would be a perfect David and Goliath story. A tale where the good guys won against the evil Stalinists, who despite their enormous powers and nefarious plots were defeated in the court of law. One might even point out that in this case, the courts worked. They upheld Memorial’s right to have a lawyer present during a search and seizure. One would also think that given Memorial’s stature in the West as a defender of human rights, their victory would have been hoisted up as a great triumph. But apparently, this good news is not fit enough for the English media to print.
Popularity: 7% [?]
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Sean, for me the key is whether Memorial gets all the material that was confiscated from them. Once they get it back (if they do), then indeed there would be cause for celebration.
You’re right of course. But I’m surprised they got this far.
The interesting thing about the materials is that its all personal and family stuff. There are few state documents. I wonder what the families represented in the archive think of all this.
Maybe the families in the archive are the reason for the search.
The official reason for the search were the possible Memorial links to the New Peterburg newspaper closed per Article 282 violation.
From my viewpoint I do not see what’s ever the trouble with the HDDs.
It was only the need of several 1TB HDDs to maintain a weekly renewed copy of their data. The HDDs to be physically stored at someone’s home.
I’m no fan of the world media, but I can understand why the offices of a human rights organisation being raided by police is more of a story than a subsequent court ruling that the raid was illegal. For sure, the ruling is good news, but better news would be that such a raid is unthinkable in the first place.
And anybody who has run an organisation in Russia would know that the purpose of the raid is to intimidate you into changing your behaviour, and tends to have this effect regardless of any subsequent court ruling. When the immigration office raid your office and start deporting your workforce for dreamt-up breaches, it is of little comfort to find later that their decision has been reversed (and no compensation forthcoming). Everyone learns early that it is far better not to upset the immigration people in the first place.
Tim Newman:
Perhaps you’ve caught an idea.
But I also agree with Sean.
Now a lot of people in the world thinks that the work of Memorial is paralyzed by authorities because of its activities to present testimonies against the Stalin regime!
While it’s simply not true.
In addition, nobody in Russia denies crimes of that regime, that point firmly holds since 1989 in the society, in media, there are lots of publications regarding Stalin’s crimes, etc.
Evgeny.
Evgeny,
Can’t argue with that.
This kind of post is why I stopped commenting on this site.
Let’s review: the Memorial offices were raided without due cause, the raid was carried out in violation of the Russian procedural code, and an entire, unique historical archive was confiscated. For months Memorial lawyers have protested, and despite the court upholding them, the officers who violated the procedural code have not been punished (as far as I can tell), there was no apology or compensation (as far as I know), and Memorial still hasn’t gotten back their archive. And the post is about how shameful it is that the English-language media has not reported an event THAT HAS NOT TAKEN PLACE. This FAILURE to regain the archive is characterized as a victory of David vs Goliath, the court system working, and a vindication of Memorial. And how do you know that Mr P or Mr M didn’t pick up the phone and tell the judge to let this one go? Is that a “victory” for the judicial system or just another case of telephone justice?
This is just intellectually silly.
mab:
The phone number of the Memorial is no secret:
http://www.memorial.spb.ru/contacts/
If you actually care that the court decision gets fulfilled, why wouldn’t you dial them and let us know what happens?
The situation when the court decision is ignored is pretty much unthinkable.
Welcome back mab, however brief it may turn out to be. You’ve been sorely missed.
Well, you can take what I said as intellectually silly if you want. You can also take what I’ve said to whatever extreme or as if I’m somehow apologizing for the regime. I’m used to those kind of allegations. I’ve been reporting on the Memorial story since the beginning, and I at least find it significant that they won in court, twice. I didn’t think they would get this far. Given how many victories, however small, people like Memorial have, it is important to note them. Plus, I think that the process is as important as the result.
But I find it intellectually silly that the English media doesn’t point the fact that Memorial won this case twice but has no problem plastering unfounded claims by Orlando Figes who uses this raid as part of his publicity stunt to claim being victim of the Kremlin as a sad attempt to boost sales in his book. Your assumption that P or M picked up the phone as ridiculous. It’s as if these two men don’t have anything better to do with themselves, like trying to run a historically ungovernable country.
Sean’ blog is a KGB blog. It even says so up in the corner.
Yeah but for some reason I have yet to see any KGB money. Maybe I should call Putin about this.
Perhaps, freedom and democracy is not less about the process, than about the condition.
Perhaps, democracy actually starts with fighting for one’s rights. And fighting denotes here not sending the bombers to a country of question, but proving one’s position in courts and winning them.
My point is that it is ridiculous to beat up on the English language press for not reporting something that hasn’t happened. There hasn’t been a victory. The archives, intact, have not been returned.
Well, we disagree. I think the media should be bashed since if Memorial would have lost this appeal, you would have heard all the usual blather about the return of Stalinism. This is because I don’t think many journalists really care about Memorial, their materials, or historical memory of the Stalin period. They only care when things occur that only confirm their often misguided assumptions about Russia.
For an organization like Memorial, winning this legal case is a victory. Very true, it’s not the end of the war. It simply is an important battle in the long process of fighting the injustice perpetrated on them.
I agree with Evgeny. Rights and democracy are not given, they are fought for. Continuously. Even if Memorial doesn’t get their materials back, they should be commended and recognized for fighting and for the small victories they achieved.
I don’t think most journalists know anything at all about the Stalin period, much less historical memory thereof. I keep hearing the “Stalin killed 40 million people” canard tossed around like it was true.
Assuming you are interested in hearing the opinion of an Elder Thing like me. I am omniscient you know.
They only care when things occur that only confirm their often misguided assumptions about Russia.
This might be true, but misguided assumptions about Russia are as common on blogs pertaining to Russia as they are in western newspapers.
Good to hear from you again, MAB! I do hope you stay around. I see Sean’s point, but as it should be clear from the first comment in this thread, I agree with you.
To be fair to Sean, he wrote a couple of posts denouncing the Memorial raid. The comments, though, were mostly disheartening.