ADC “Memorial” has received decision of the the judge of the 8th court department O.Glushanok dated May 27, 2013 on the return of the materials on administrative case No. 5-221/2013-8

The judge has ruled that decision No.35-78-2013 on administrative violation dated April 30, 2013 contains considerable deficiencies, which cannot be corrected in the course of the consideration of the case. This decision confirms the position of the private charity association ADC “Memorial” concerning the impossibility of application of article 19.34 of the Code of administrative violations to ADC “Memorial”.

Judge of the 8th court department O.Glushanok has ruled that “the provided documents do not prove the circumstances described in the decision No.35-78-2013 on administrative violation dated April 30, 2013”. In particular, the  judge stated that the procurator’s office had not provided information about the time and place of the violation it had stated, as well as that it had not provided other proof necessary to ground the opinion of the procurator’s office that private charity association ADC “Memorial” is an organization executing the functions of a foreign agent. The proof of foreign financing for preparation of the report “Roma people, migrants, activists”: victims of police arbitrariness” was absent.

The judge is of the opinion that “considering a juridical person the subject of one section of article 19.34 of the Code on administrtive violations means that the same juridical person cannot be considered subject to another section of the same article, because the necessary condition for considering it the subject is inclusion (or non-inclusion) of a non-commercial organization into the register of non-commercial organizations which execute the functions of a foeign agent”.

Thus the judge considers illegal the charges on sections 1 and 2of the Article 19.34 of the Code on administrative violations.

The judge has also stated that the address of website and the location of ADC “Memorial” given in the resolution of the procurator’s office could not be considered as the scene of the illegal action since informational resources can be located in many countries, while publication of information on the website could be done by various persons and information can be stored in a remote location.

decision (on Russian)


Эта запись так же доступна на: Russian