BORIS KAGARLITSKY, MOSCOW
CASE ON KILLED WILD RAMS: CONTINUATION
It seems that in this spring not only weather but also the political climate in Russia is getting warm. Although those symptoms are unconvincing, they continue to multiply turning particular cases into a tendency. The crime committed by police major Denis Yevsyukov, who has shot down innocent people in a Moscow supermarket, led to a dismissal of Vladimir Pronin, head of the Moscow police – there is no precedent for this event in Russia where top officials are not accustomed to being responsible not only for the actions of their subordinates but also for those of their own. The criminal case, which Prosecutor General’s Office opened against the officials, who poached wild rams recorded in Red Book in January, is another gift to the society.
This is significant that it took Prosecutor General’s Office more than four months to open the case, though all the evidences were available immediately after the ill-starred helicopter with bureaucrats had been crashed. The killed animals were near dead and injured passengers. The photographs were published on the Internet websites several days later while protest rallies were held in Gorny Altai. For all that, Prosecutor General’s Office decided to consider the crash circumstances turning a blind eye to visible signs of poaching.
Then the protest actions were held in Moscow. Alexander Berdnikov, governor of Altai region, had to fire his deputy Anatoly Bannykh, who was one of the hunters. However the greens demanded the official investigation. Federal Service on Supervision in the Sphere of Nature Management applied to Prosecutor General’s Office also with delay. Prosecutor General’s Office reacted unexpectedly promptly, the criminal case was opened on May 4th.
Evidently, this is not the whole story. The questions are whether the case will come to trial, what sentences will be given and whom they will be given on. It is quite possible that Prosecutor General’s Office came to display an interest in the Altai poaching not only because of the people’s pressure but also because of the political intrigues connected with Mr Berdnikov who is about to be dismissed. It is also clear, however, that if the public protest actions were not held, we could not hope for triumph of justice, even if it would be tardy.
“The case on killed wild rams” with its limitedness and specificity is an important political lesson for the society rather than a particular case. The organizers of the protest marches have always stated that “this battle can be won”. The campaign against poaching showed that well-organized and purposeful public pressure could be efficient even in Russia. Incidentally, the activists, who initiated the actions to protect “South Park” animated cartoon several months ago, also scored a success. The cartoon was about to be banned for offending public morality, but anti-censorship protests forced the authorities to drop their charge. There continues a struggle around the education reform, which is rejected by the majority of teachers and schoolchildren, and around a new version of the Civil Code limiting the freedom of the Internet users. Those are also “battles that can be won”.
Success of environmental protests sharply contrasts with senselessness of the statements made by the liberal opposition who demands “the government resignation” or “the regime overthrow” rather than solution to concrete issues. The government is not going to resign, and the regime is not going to overthrow itself (although such events happened in the Russian history). The population’s indifference to such protests makes comic the opposition’s efforts to look like the vanguard followed by imaginary masses. Meanwhile the population is concerned about political events. The ordinary people understand the sense of what is going on and their potential much better than professional rebels do. The ordinary people are ready to take part in the protest actions when it comes to specific issues and protection of their own interests, but they are unwilling to be beaten by riot police for the sake of abstract ideas that they do not share (whether these are liberal ideas or those of far left). The fact that the society is wiser, more careful and more pragmatic than such rebels does not mean that the people are apathetic. They have learned to think over the past years.
“Case on killed wild rams” indicates that a protest makes difference only if it pursues a concrete object. The case is becoming an argument that is weighty for many people and an example that will be followed.
Boris Kagarlitsky is Director of the Institute of Globalization and Social Movements
May 14, 2009
|
