Oh no, you're thinking, yet another cookie pop-up. Well, sorry, it's the law. We measure how many people read us, and ensure you see relevant ads, by storing cookies on your device. If you're cool with that, hit “Accept all Cookies”. For more info and to customize your settings, hit “Customize Settings”.

Review and manage your consent

Here's an overview of our use of cookies, similar technologies and how to manage them. You can also change your choices at any time, by hitting the “Your Consent Options” link on the site's footer.

Manage Cookie Preferences
  • These cookies are strictly necessary so that you can navigate the site as normal and use all features. Without these cookies we cannot provide you with the service that you expect.

  • These cookies are used to make advertising messages more relevant to you. They perform functions like preventing the same ad from continuously reappearing, ensuring that ads are properly displayed for advertisers, and in some cases selecting advertisements that are based on your interests.

  • These cookies collect information in aggregate form to help us understand how our websites are being used. They allow us to count visits and traffic sources so that we can measure and improve the performance of our sites. If people say no to these cookies, we do not know how many people have visited and we cannot monitor performance.

See also our Cookie policy and Privacy policy.

This article is more than 1 year old

It's OK to fine someone for repeating a historical fact, says Russian Supreme Court

Truly bizarre decision over web post about invasion of Poland in 1939

The Russian Supreme Court has upheld a conviction against a blogger who correctly noted that the Soviet Union jointly invaded Poland with the Nazi government in 1939.

The truly bizarre decision follows the conviction of 37-year-old Vladimir Luzgin earlier this year for posting "knowingly false information," under a new law that is supposed to prevent the glorification of Nazism, but which critics say is being used to rewrite Russian history and quash critics of Vladimir Putin's annexation of Crimea.

Luzgin was fined 200,000 roubles ($3,000) for correctly stating that the Soviet Union had collaborated with the Nazis to invade Poland in 1939. He wrote:

The communists and Germany jointly invaded Poland, sparking off the Second World War. That is, communism and Nazism closely collaborated, yet for some reason they blame Bandera, who was in a German concentration camp, for declaring Ukrainian independence.

Despite the collaboration being an historical fact, the Supreme Court decided that Luzgin's post constituted a "public denial of the Nuremberg Trials" and provided "false information about the activities of the USSR during the years of the Second World War."

A report of the trial by an organization monitoring human rights in Ukraine noted that history professor Alexander Vertinsky acted for the prosecution and argued that the post "did not correspond with the position accepted at international level."

Twisted

The claim about the post "denying" the Nuremberg trials is based on the twisted logic that the trials did not mention Russia's invasion of Poland. That much is true – largely because Russia played a significant role in the trials and so steered them away from any discussion of Russia's early collaboration with Nazi Germany.

Of course, that doesn't mean the coordinated invasion didn't happen – it did, as any number of historians would be willing to confirm, as well as millions of Poles. It has long been known that the agreement to invade Poland took place under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which was secret at the time but is now readily available and referenced in just about every World War Two history book.

The issue, of course, is that Luzgin both criticized the Kremlin and supported Ukraine. The post was titled "15 facts about Bandera supporters, or what the Kremlin is silent about."

The Bandera referred to is Stepan Bandera, an historical figure that became a famed Ukranian nationalist. He was assassinated by the KGB in 1959 and has become a figurehead for a new movement critical of Russia's annexation of Crimea and its continued interference in the country.

As a result, the Kremlin has been clamping down on people posting about Bandera. That the country's supreme court has decided to ignore historical fact in order to uphold a purely political prosecution is an extraordinary new low however.

Luzgin's lawyer, Henry Reznik, said after the decision that the Supreme Court had "discredited itself" and said he would appeal the ruling. ®

Similar topics

Similar topics

Similar topics

TIP US OFF

Send us news


Other stories you might like