{"id":2937,"date":"2017-12-20T19:06:48","date_gmt":"2017-12-20T19:06:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/news\/2017\/12\/20\/report-a-hearing-in-the-lenoblsud-about-the-prohibition-of-the-translation-of-the-bible\/"},"modified":"2021-08-18T10:25:33","modified_gmt":"2021-08-18T07:25:33","slug":"report-a-hearing-in-the-lenoblsud-about-the-prohibition-of-the-translation-of-the-bible","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/report-a-hearing-in-the-lenoblsud-about-the-prohibition-of-the-translation-of-the-bible\/","title":{"rendered":"Report: A hearing in the Lenoblsud about the prohibition of the translation of the Bible"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
December 20, 2017<\/span>Go to the bottom of this page<\/a>Collapse<\/a><\/span><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n
14:00<\/span><\/th>\nThe hearings continue in the historic building, an architectural monument of federal significance.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In it from 1835 to 1918 there was the Imperial College of Law, graduates of which left a notable mark in the history of Russia.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In 2017, within the walls of this building is a trial that can become historical: for the first time in modern Russia, a book that influenced the development of civilization, the Bible, may be prohibited.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
14:10<\/span><\/th>\nListeners who came to the process are waiting at the entrance to the building from the side of Tchaikovsky Street – a famous composer who studied in the walls of this building and was one of the graduates of the School of Jurisprudence.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2:30 pm<\/span><\/th>\n\n

Thick walls of the building make it difficult for Internet communication, because of which the report can be delayed.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the Ostankino Court of Moscow experts appeared in full force.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0They are accompanied by a group of men.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In the corridors Lenoblsuda began hearing about 50 people, including representatives of the embassies of the United States, Britain and the Netherlands.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The number of representatives of the prosecutor’s office increased in the ranks of advisers in justice and senior advisors in justice.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

14:50<\/span><\/th>\nThe hearings have not yet begun.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Also to the hall in the Lenoblsud were diplomatic employees of Switzerland.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:20<\/span><\/th>\n\n

The hearings have not yet begun.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0A slightly larger room was allocated, the court staff made two additional benches.<\/span>Participants and listeners of the process are waiting in the corridor.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

3:30 pm<\/span><\/th>\nThe court secretary apologized for the delay and explained that it was connected with the establishment of a videoconference connection with Moscow.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The process should begin soon.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:40<\/span><\/th>\nThe trial begins.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In the Ostankino court there are two representatives of religious organizations, Alexander Dyubin and lawyer Anton Omelchenko.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:45<\/span><\/th>\nAll three experts came to court: Batov, Kotelnikov, Kryukova.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In Lenoblsud the religious organization is represented by lawyer Anton Bogdanov and representative Maxim Novakov.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The prosecutor’s office is represented by Justice Advisor Zhukov, and Senior Counselor of Justice Ganikhin.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:48<\/span><\/th>\nRepresentative Novakov said that in the court of first instance, as an expert, an expert was admitted, the famous philologist Anatoly Baranov.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He solicits his admission to participate in the survey of experts.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The court is satisfied.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:50<\/span><\/th>\nAnatoly Baranov enters the hall and takes a place among the participants in the process.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The Moscow court has asked for admission to the courtroom of listeners.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The court allows 16 listeners to enter (by the number of seats).<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:53<\/span><\/th>\nThe Chamber of Judges consists of the presiding judge Larisa Gorbatova, the judge-rapporteur Tatyana Khruleva and the judge Igor Kosarev.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15:55<\/span><\/th>\nLawyer Bogdanov declares the circumstances that became known after the decision of the court of first instance.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0It turns out that on the basis of an expert opinion carried out by these specialists, two Sergius Posadis, professing the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses, were prosecuted.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0However, during the trial, the findings of the examination of Kryukova, Kotelnikov and Tarasov were refuted, and the Sergiev Posad people are justified.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Bogdanov also cites other examples of expert opinions of these specialists against Jehovah’s Witnesses who are recognized as erroneous.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0This testifies to the lack of objectivity and impartiality of concrete experts to Jehovah’s Witnesses.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4pm<\/span><\/th>\nAs a result, the lawyer declares to experts that the challenge is not credible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0As evidence of his words Bogdanov asks to attach materials to the case on 280 pages.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:05<\/span><\/th>\nThe court asks the opinion of representatives of the prosecutor’s office.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0They object to the challenge.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Experts themselves, too, rising up, reject charges of bias.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0To resolve the issue, the court is removed to the advisory room.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:25<\/span><\/th>\nFor about 20 minutes the court is in the advisory room.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0It is noteworthy that the Leningrad-Finland transport prosecutor Alexander Ganikhin is involved in this process.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4:30 pm<\/span><\/th>\nThe court reads its definition.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In the selection of experts refused.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:35<\/span><\/th>\nAdvocate Bogdanov solicits the removal of experts from the courtroom of two experts for the time being until the third one is questioned.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The prosecutor’s office objects.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:38<\/span><\/th>\nOn the spot, the court decided to refuse the petition.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:45<\/span><\/th>\nThe judge of the Ostankino court Olesya Sushkova, having checked the appearance and warning about the criminal responsibility of the experts, is being removed.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The meeting continues on a videoconference link under the chairmanship of the board of judges of the Leningrad Regional Court.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:47<\/span><\/th>\nPresiding Judge Larisa Gorbatova finds out from Natalia Kryukova which books were sent to her for the study.<\/span>Kryukova holds a Bible with the publishing name “Holy Scripture – Translation of a New World” in a gray cover.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0She claims she researched this book.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4:50 pm<\/span><\/th>\nJudge Gorbatova is trying to find out why the text of the examination says that the subject of the study is a book with an English name.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Lawyers ask the court not to prompt answers to the expert.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:53<\/span><\/th>\nExpert Kryukova says that it was written by mistake.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Judges continue to ask the expert, where did the English name come from?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Kryukova says that Greek Scriptures in English means the Gospels.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16:57<\/span><\/th>\nJudge Gorbatova asks directly: is this edition a Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Expert Kryukova: “This publication is not a Bible in the traditional sense of Orthodox Christianity.”<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0This edition, according to Kryukova, is a sacred text of the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5pm<\/span><\/th>\nExpert Kryukova said that the legislator, adopting an amendment to the law, had in mind the Bible, which is respected in different religions: in Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Protestantism.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:02<\/span><\/th>\nThe court begins to interview the expert Kotelnikov.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Judge Gorbatova asks: “Is not this a technical error?” Kotelnikov agrees.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The judge proposes to open the Bible on the page before the Gospel of Matthew, where it is written that the translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures goes on.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The judge asks whether this is an explanation of the fact that the examination uses the name “Greek Scriptures”.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0After long hesitation and after a hint, Kriukova answers that “this is the same thing.”<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0And what is this book?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0“This is a very free translation of the Bible, let’s put it this way,” concludes expert Kotelnikov.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:10<\/span><\/th>\nExpert Batov confidently declares that a technical error was made.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He does not believe that this edition is the Bible.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:20<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov’s representative asks the expert Kotelnikov where the technical error originated, namely, how the reference to the English book “Christian Greek Scriptures” appeared in the examination.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Kotelnikov can not answer.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Kryukov is called to explain.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0She says: “This is the cost of excess knowledge of English.”<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:22<\/span><\/th>\nThe court removes a number of lawyers’ questions to understand why experts believe that “Holy Scripture” is not a Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Among other things, questions are removed: what is the original language of the Bible, how many books are the Bible.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:27<\/span><\/th>\nLawyer Omelchenko refers to the work of the fourth year student mentioned in the text of the examination, dedicated to the publication of the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Omelchenko shows this publication to the expert Kryukova and asks which of the two editions the student was examining.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5:30 pm<\/span><\/th>\nOmelchenko’s lawyer refers to the questions posed to the experts, where the experts are asked to quote specific quotes from the publication.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He asks why no one quotation from the “Holy Scripture” is included in the examination.<\/span>Kryukova said that her conclusions about the extremist nature of the book “are based on the general orientation of the texts.”<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Omelchenko: “Do I understand correctly that you can not quote a single quote?” The court removes this question.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:35<\/span><\/th>\nOmelchenko is trying to find out what methods are used by experts to come to the conclusion that this publication is not a Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Kryukova explains that the comparison of the text “Holy Scripture – Translation of the New World” with the text of the Synodal translation by experts was not carried out.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:40<\/span><\/th>\nQuestions are asked by the representative of Dyubin.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0On his question, the expert Kryukova explains that the Bible can not be considered a book if it is not marked “by the blessing of the patriarch” or if this book does not match word-for-word with such a translation.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17:50<\/span><\/th>\nJudge Gorbatova asks Kryukova, finally, to formulate what exactly she sees as extremism in the “Holy Scripture”?<\/span>Kryukova responds that this is a legal matter and a court must answer it, and she, as an expert, has no right to answer this question by law.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:05<\/span><\/th>\nLawyer Bogdanov refers to a line from the expert conclusion, which says that “Holy Scripture” “is not an adequate translation.”<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Bogdanov asks what was the criterion of adequacy-inadequacy.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Kryukov finds it difficult to answer, so the question is forwarded to expert Tarasov.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Tarasov said that the translation would be adequate, which conveys the meaning “at the level of the whole text.”<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:10<\/span><\/th>\nIn addition, Tarasov explains that the adequacy of the translation should be determined by the activity that the text generates.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0If the activity generated by the original corresponds to the activity generated by the translation, then the translation is adequate.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:15<\/span><\/th>\nThe court turns to Professor Baranov for help.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He says there are many criteria, but the criterion, named by expert Tarasov, is unknown to him.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:22<\/span><\/th>\nThe court determines to finish the survey of experts.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:28<\/span><\/th>\nProsecutor Zhukov considers the decision of the court of first instance to be lawful and justified.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Asks to deny the complaint.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:30<\/span><\/th>\nProsecutor Ganikhin briefly repeats the words of his colleague.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:31<\/span><\/th>\nThe court rejects the earlier application for reappointment (taking into account the explanations provided by the experts Kryukova, Tarasov, Kotelnikov).<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:34<\/span><\/th>\nLawyer Bogdanov declares the petition to leave the claim of the prosecutor’s office without consideration due to the fact that the claim was signed and filed by an unauthorized person, since according to the law such a request can be submitted by the prosecutor no lower than the prosecutor’s office of the subject of the Russian Federation.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:37<\/span><\/th>\nLawyers wanted to ask relevant questions to the Leningrad-Finnish transport prosecutor.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0When sitting on the spot, the court refuses to satisfy the petition for leaving the claim without consideration.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:39<\/span><\/th>\nRepresentative Novakov said the discontinuation of proceedings in the case of the brochure “The Bible and its main topic”, as in relation to this brochure there is already entered into force the decision of another court on the absence of signs of extremism in it.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:47<\/span><\/th>\nA representative of the prosecutor’s office Zhukov said that the prosecutor’s office has no evidence that the court decision that came into force was issued on the same brochure.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He recalls that in Russia there is no Anglo-Saxon system of law and there is no “precedent”.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In this connection, he does not agree with the petition to stop the proceedings.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:50<\/span><\/th>\nThe court, when conferring on the spot, rejects the petition for termination of the proceedings in the part of the pamphlet.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:53<\/span><\/th>\nRepresentatives of religious organizations declare a petition for the incorporation of new evidence that testifies to the bias of experts.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Among them are the protocols of the notarial inspection of the Wikipedia site, from which the borrowings in the text of the examination are visible, and therefore the lack of autonomy of the experts’ conclusions.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18:56<\/span><\/th>\nThe court shall satisfy the application for the attachment of the materials.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:00<\/span><\/th>\nReferring to today’s oral explanation of the expert Kryukova about what the legislator meant by the Bible, accepting an amendment to protect the Bible from the anti-extremist legislation (Kryukova said that the legislator had in mind the Bible, which is respected in different religions: in Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Protestantism), a representative of Novakov declares a petition for sending to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation a judicial request for clarification of the concept of the Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The prosecutor’s office considers this petition as a drag on the trial.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The court rejects this petition.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:05<\/span><\/th>\nThe court rejects the petition of the lawyer Bogdanov for the appointment of an additional examination, in connection with the fact that the experts did not quote a single quote from the “Holy Scripture” in support of their conclusions.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:07<\/span><\/th>\nLawyer Omelchenko declares a separate petition for the appointment of an additional examination to the Institute of Judaica and Bible Studies at St. Petersburg State University.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Omelchenko solicits the question of asking the experts if the “Holy Scripture” is a translation of the critical scientific texts of the original sources of the Bible, namely the publication of the text of the original source of the Westcott and Hort Bible and the publication of the text of the original source of the Bible, called Hebraika Studgarten.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The Institute of Judaica and Biblical Studies, judging from the data on its official website, is competent to perform the translation of the Bible.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:15<\/span><\/th>\nThe court rejects the petition.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:17<\/span><\/th>\nThe court begins to examine the case materials.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Representative Novakov pays attention to available in the case of extracts from authoritative scientific catalogs in which “Holy Scripture – Translation of the New World” is included in the list of translations of the Bible.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:25<\/span><\/th>\nThe attention of the court is drawn to the extracts from the core scientific literature explaining the meaning of God’s name “Jehovah”, its position in the Bible and the history of its use in Bible translations.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:35<\/span><\/th>\nThe court reads scientific materials indicating that “Holy Scripture” occupies a legitimate place in a number of Bible translations.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:40<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov’s representative solicits an examination of the material evidence in the case materials – a voluminous book with the text of the original source of the Bible, entitled “Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia”.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The court announces a 2-minute break to bring this book to the courtroom.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19:50<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov draws attention to the table of contents of this book.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Seeing that the book is mostly in Hebrew, Judge Gorbatov states that this is nothing more than a mockery of the court.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Lawyer Omelchenko argues that the mockery can be called the very fact that lawyers are forced to prove the obvious things that the Bible is the Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In addition, previously unsuccessfully a petition was submitted for sending these materials to experts in Judaica and biblical studies who could compare and make sure that “Holy Scripture” is a translation of the Bible.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
8pm<\/span><\/th>\nThe court rejects the request for a break until the next day, as the court has an irregular working day.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Declares a 10-minute technical break.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:15<\/span><\/th>\nThe court session was continued.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Novakov’s representative draws attention to the examinations carried out by authoritative scientists in the matter, as well as reviews of the expertise of Kryukova and her colleagues.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0There are serious methodological errors in the examination of Kryukova.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:40<\/span><\/th>\nThe court does not allow Representative Novakoff to finish the review of the materials of the case (for which the representatives have a procedural right).<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Representative Novakov asked to enter into the record an objection to the actions of the presiding judge.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:45<\/span><\/th>\nLawyer Omelchenko draws attention to a fragment in “Holy Scripture” (1 John 4: 7-10), in which readers are directly urged to show love for one’s neighbor.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Omelchenko’s actions cause an acute reaction from the judiciary.<\/span>Omelchenko explains that it is necessary to establish the falsity of accusations against this book in inciting hatred.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:47<\/span><\/th>\nOmelchenko’s lawyer argues that the court’s challenge is dismissed with reference to prejudice.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The court refuses to consider this challenge, arguing that the stage of allotments has passed.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:50<\/span><\/th>\nRepresentatives state a petition for full disclosure in the courtroom of the full text of the “Holy Scripture.”<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0This is necessary when deciding whether this book is extremist.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The court rejects the petition.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:55<\/span><\/th>\nThe court passes to the stage of debate.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The first advocate is Bogdanov.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20:57<\/span><\/th>\nBogdanov draws attention to the fact that a subscription to criminal liability will not add competence to incompetent experts.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Subscription is not also a “truth serum”, making the conclusions of the expert Kryukova known to be true.<\/span>Bogdanov refers to the conclusions of the most authoritative scientists available in the matter.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Bogdanov calls on the court to believe his eyes, and not to make a decision, fully trusting the compromised experts, Kryukova and her colleagues.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Bogdanov asks to cancel the decision of the first instance and make a new decision, completely rejecting the demands of the prosecutor’s office.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
9pm<\/span><\/th>\nSpeaker representative Novakov.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He recalls that the court of first instance in its decision did not bother to quote any quotes that the court would consider extremist.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Referring to today’s poll of the expert Kryukova and her colleagues, he recalls the grounds on the basis of which experts refuse to “Holy Scripture” in the right to be called the Bible.<\/span>This is the use of the name “Jehovah”, and also that “Holy Scripture” does not proclaim the triune God.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Novakov in his speech quotes a number of excerpts from the Church’s Synodal translation, which also disproves the triune God.<\/span>“What, it is necessary to recognize as extremist and the Synodal translation?” Novakoff asks.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:10<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov reminds that, according to current legislation, even open criticism of religious organizations and beliefs can not be considered extremism.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Moreover, there is no reason to recognize the translation of the Bible as extremist.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:12<\/span><\/th>\nAs for the expertise of Kryukova, Novakov says, you, a respected court, should in this sense highlight it and press the “delete” button!<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Just throw it in the trash!<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0So this examination is vicious.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:17<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov reminds that experts today spoke about the “Orthodox Bible.”<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Such a Bible does not exist.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The Bible is one for all.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:19<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov draws attention to the fact that the experts worked for 287 days on their research, but did not even reach the second page of the “Holy Scripture” filled with the text, namely the Preface, where it is written in black and white that this book is the Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Experts say in their study that “Holy Scripture” does not even call itself the Bible, so it is not.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:23<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov draws attention to the signs of discrimination.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:25<\/span><\/th>\nWhat exactly is the legitimate aim pursued by the prosecutor’s office?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0What is he trying to achieve?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0That hundreds of thousands of Russian-speaking citizens who read this Bible burned it?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Or, if they do not want to do this, so that they are subject to criminal prosecution?<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:27<\/span><\/th>\nNovakov reviews the international law and practice of the European Court of Human Rights.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:30<\/span><\/th>\nIn the debate, the representative of Dyubin.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He says that “Holy Scripture” is the Bible and it’s silly to argue with it.<\/span>He says that you do not need to be an expert so that, after scanning the “Holy Scripture”, you will be convinced that this is the Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The same stories, the same characters, the same sequence of presentation.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:32<\/span><\/th>\nDyubin says that even if we imagine such an absurd hypothetical situation, as if “Holy Scripture” is not the Bible, then why is there not a single “extremist” quote in the court’s decision?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Where is at least one proof of the extremism of this book?<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0How could the court of first instance recognize this book as extremist?<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:37<\/span><\/th>\nReferring to the legislation on the status of judges, he recalls that when making their decisions, judges should be guided by their conscience.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0This is a gift from God to man.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Dyubin asks to cancel the decision of the court of first instance.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:38<\/span><\/th>\nThe speech in the debate begins with the lawyer Omelchenko.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He draws attention to the fact that the court of first instance condemns believers to degrading treatment by taking away the “Holy Scripture” from them.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0Omelchenko focuses on the review of the European Convention on Human Rights.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:45<\/span><\/th>\nSpeech in the debate begins the representative of the prosecutor’s office Zhukov.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He believes that everything said by his opponents is aimed at reassessing the conclusions of the court of first instance decision.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0In addition, Zhukov believes that representatives of stakeholders translate the dispute into the plane of religious disputes.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He sees no reason to change the decision of the court of first instance.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:48<\/span><\/th>\nThe Leningrad-Finland transport prosecutor Ganikhin considers the decision of the Vyborg court lawful.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0He believes that the representatives of stakeholders had one goal – to involve the court and the parties in the theological dispute that there is a religion of God or the Bible.<\/span>\u00c2\u00a0The legitimacy and validity of the examination he doubts does not cause.<\/span>He asks to refuse to satisfy the appeal.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:51<\/span><\/th>\nThe court is removed to the advisory room to make a decision.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21:55<\/span><\/th>\nThe court reads the decision: to leave the Vyborg court’s decision unchanged, the appellate complaint is not satisfied.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

December 20, 2017Go to the bottom of this pageCollapse 14:00 The hearings continue in the historic building, an architectural monument of federal significance.\u00c2\u00a0In it from 1835 to 1918 there was the Imperial College of Law,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2937","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news-news","category-russia"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2937","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2937"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2937\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5732,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2937\/revisions\/5732"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2937"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2937"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jwforum.net\/portal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2937"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}