Skip to main content

Domestic Violence Law: Protection from Tyrant or Attack on the Family

The Federation Council plans to complete work on the so-called “draft law on domestic violence” by December 1. We are talking about the legislative consolidation of the prevention of domestic, including psychological, domestic violence, which they have been trying to implement in vain for 10 years. The main goal of the document is to provide victims of violence with the right to protection from the aggressor, as well as to reduce the number of such crimes.

Bills have been submitted to the State Duma 40 times already, but none of them even reached the first reading.

However, a number of experts believe that such a law, if adopted, will lead to the destruction of the institution of the family and make almost half of the citizens of Russia criminals.

The first deputy chairman of the Federation Council committee on social policy Inna Svyatenko said that by December 1 it is planned to complete the preparation of a bill on the prevention of domestic violence. And Tatyana Kasaeva, a member of the State Duma Committee on Education and Science, explained that this law is necessary, since now the state can interfere in the private life of citizens only after a crime has been committed, while there are practically no preventive measures.

“You can tighten the legislation as much as you like, come up with different measures, weaken the law somewhere. But if we do not carry out systematic work to ensure that these facts do not exist at all, everything is useless. It is wrong when the prosecutor’s office deals with one thing, the Ministry of Internal Affairs deals with another, and social activists do something else. Because the Ministry of Internal Affairs may have information that there are facts of violence in the family that have not yet passed into either the criminal or the administrative plane. And other bodies, for example, guardianship authorities, may not know these facts. Comprehensive measures are needed, – the deputy explained.

In addition, Kasayeva stressed that domestic violence is committed not only against women, but also children, disabled people, the elderly, and in some cases even healthy men suffer from it. These aspects will be taken into account in the final version of the document. In addition, if the bill is passed, victims of violence will be entitled to rehabilitation and a protective order, according to which the aggressors will be prohibited from approaching their victims.

However, opponents of the bill believe that its essence is not in helping victims of violence, but in an attempt to destroy the institution of the family and to obtain the right to take children away from their parents without trial or investigation. In particular, expert of the All-Russian Research Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, criminologist Elena Timoshina emphasizes that this document introduces the concept of “psychological violence”, which is very subjective and will be interpreted by judges, which is called the taste and color. All this can lead to unjustified prosecution of citizens or the seizure of their children. “People will be afraid to enter into serious relationships, into family relationships. Why should I do this, if for every sidelong glance, ill-conceived word I can be held accountable? ” – Timoshina explained.

It is interesting that similar bills have been submitted to the State Duma 40 times over the past 10 years, but none of them even reached the first reading.

Removed from the law: parents fear online will destroy traditional schools

The number of parents opposing online education is growing rapidly in the country. Adults are afraid that the distance in schools can be introduced on an ongoing basis, and the coronavirus pandemic only accelerates the digitalization of education previously planned by the authorities.

These fears are not unfounded. On November 18, the State Duma will consider a bill on distance education in Russia. The State Duma Committee on Education and Science recommended the document for adoption in the first reading. The new law will define the powers of the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Education in terms of regulating the procedure for using e-learning and distance technologies in educational institutions.

The State Duma was recommended to approve the bill on distance education

In recent weeks, protests against remote control have been taking place in different regions of Russia. Parents are organizing large-scale flash mobs against remote removal on social networks, boycotting online classes for whole classes and collecting signatures under appeals to the authorities. Despite accusations of COVID dissidence, the movement is gathering more and more supporters. We found out what really drives adults to demand to return their children to school, despite the threat of coronavirus infection.

“The fight against remoteness is not a story at all about COVID, but about the large-scale destruction of Russian education that has been happening in the last 15-20 years,” says Ekaterina, an opponent of remote control from Yekaterinburg. – Plans for large-scale digitalization of schools appeared among officials 10 years ago, the pandemic only accelerated these processes. The experiment on the implementation of the Digital educational environment, which started in the fall in 15 regions of the country without parental consent, was approved by the former Minister of Education Olga Vasilyeva at the end of 2019. In federal projects for the development of education for the coming years, it is stated in plain text that by 2024 at least 70% of schools must implement education in electronic form. All of these goals were set long before the pandemic. We do not deny that distance can be used as a temporary measure in emergency situations, as well as on an ongoing basis with parental consent. Of course, electronic technology is essential for learning, for example, for children with disabilities who are unable to attend school. However, we do not want an equal sign between the distance and the point.

Parents are outraged and surprised that while the doors of public schools, circles and sections have closed for children, private educational organizations continue to work safely. It comes to the ridiculous, in the same sports center, children cannot be engaged in budgetary sections, but they can do it in paid ones. It turns out that full-time education is now available only to those who can pay?

“In recent years, parents and teachers have already lost in the struggle for education in all positions,” says Alena, mother of a 7th grade student from St. Petersburg. – We could not fight off, including from the Unified State Exam, from the introduction of low-quality textbooks instead of time-tested manuals, every year the quality of education decreases. If we keep quiet, then just as quietly in a few years we may face the fact that free classes will be held only at a distance, and we will have to pay for full-time classes. The maintenance of educational institutions is very expensive for the state, and the general retirement may well solve this problem. We see this threat as real, in this regard, we demand to legalize distance learning as one of the forms of education that can be used only at the request of parents or in the event of an emergency that applies to all schools, both public and private. Now we are faced with the fact that directors of educational institutions, in response to our complaints, declare that teaching with the use of distance learning technologies is equivalent to full-time. The teacher, on the other hand, conducts classes in real time, which, they say, you still need.

In the meantime, many children have already had health problems in online education. In addition, the distance has hurt the socialization of schoolchildren, and a prolonged lack of normal communication can turn into very long-term consequences for some children.

“Young people today have spent too much time in the virtual world even without remote control,” says another parent, Natalya. – Many teenagers no longer really go for a walk, but communicate with friends only on social networks. And this is a serious social problem that distance learning only exacerbates. My 9th-grader daughter has been studying online for a month now, the circle she went to does not work, as a result, it is no longer possible to drag her out even to the street to walk with the dog. But what can we say, even convincing to wear normal clothes instead of pajamas does not always work. Many children started having health problems in the spring: their eyesight falls, their head and back hurt, their sleep is disturbed, and some children have apathy and depression. So it turns out that the authorities, while fighting one threat, create another one for children, possibly even greater, the consequences of which we, parents, will have to clear up.

See also: “The psychologist explained how not to quarrel with a teenage child in quarantine”

The youngest “thief in law” was imprisoned for 11 years for old cases

Criminal authority Shalva Ozmanov, nicknamed Kusya (Kuso), who is called the youngest thief in law, was sentenced by the Moscow City Court to 11 years in prison. The grand-nephew of another well-known mafioso, Shakro Molodoy, was reminded of the shooting at a car wash six years ago and heaped up with a relatively new article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Occupying a high position in the criminal hierarchy.”

The Moscow City Court sentenced Shalva Ozmanov, nicknamed Kusya, for shooting at a gas station six years ago

Let us remind you that a year ago Shalva Ozmanov was detained in the Krasnodar Territory and accused of intentionally causing grievous bodily harm. Six years ago in Moscow, Kuso shot a car wash administrator in the buttock. At that time, this episode was hushed up thanks to an agreement with the victim. But later there were witnesses to the shot who were ready to confirm their testimony at the trial. In addition, Ozmanov was charged under the “anti-thief” article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. On top of everything else, he had a suspended sentence – two years for illegal carrying of a pistol, with which the “authority” threatened visitors of one of the Krasnodar bars.

Ozmanov’s mother went to almost every court session. The mother of the thief in law had one answer to all the journalists’ questions:

– My son is innocent!

The defense provided the court with a written statement from the victim, which says that Shalva did not shoot him in the buttock.

“We ask to discontinue the criminal case against Ozmanov, since he is innocent of what happened and has nothing to do with it,” the judge read out. – I will not even discuss this statement. He does not join the materials of the case, I will not leave it to myself.

The prosecutor invited an operative, who briefly spoke about how he came to the hospital to the victim to seize an important material evidence – a bullet.

When Ozmanov’s lawyers asked whether he personally removed the bullet, the operative laughed and replied:

– No, doctors helped me.

As for the charges under the “anti-thief” article, the defense of Kusya interpreted this in its own way.

“My client calls himself a thief, not a thief in law,” the lawyer tried to justify Ozmanov.

One way or another, the Moscow State Court sentenced Ozmanov to 11 years in a strict regime.

– Such terms are given to pedophiles. For what 11 years? Now everyone is wearing tattoos, women are wearing tattoos! And now to plant for this? – Kusya’s mother Tamara Petrova was indignant.

The authors of the draft law on domestic violence staged a “fight”

The authors of the long-suffering domestic violence prevention bill have gathered again to defend their position. Serious passions have been boiling around him lately. The situation with the document is ambiguous: firstly, it is not clear in what form it will be sent to the State Duma. And after Vladimir Putin at his press conference expressed doubts about the advisability of adopting such a law, his supporters generally fell into a stupor.

“Is this law necessary? Let’s calmly discuss it in the public, ”the President of the country urged. This is exactly what the Federation Council is doing now: it is studying all the proposals received on the site after the publication of the text of the document, and is trying to bungle the sane document. After all, the one that can now be seen on the website of the Federation Council, according to most experts, is legally illiterate. For example, the draft law provides for a protective order, according to which the tyrant partner will be prohibited from contacting the victim, and may also be ordered to leave the shared housing. But there is no sample of such an order, although any legislation is based on annexes, regulations.

According to this text, a number of new types of violence are introduced, including psychological and economic ones, which caused the greatest amount of controversy. Thus, a disgruntled wife or child will be able to accuse the father of the family of economic violence if the latter refuses to buy the desired thing for family members, and so on. But these concepts remained in the published version of the draft law.

Doubts are also caused by the fact that the bill involves an extrajudicial invasion of the privacy of citizens.

Without a doubt, the document also contains a lot of useful information. For example, it is important that when registering a case of violence, not only the appeal of the victim himself will be taken into account, but also the statements of eyewitnesses: neighbors, health workers, if the latter suspect that their patient has been subjected to such violence. Although there can be excesses in this area: any ill-wisher who dreams of ruining the life of a particular family can call the police.

The authors of the bill tried to outline all these advantages yesterday.

First Deputy Chairperson of the Federation Council Committee on Social Policy Inna Svyatenko informed that the bill does not carry any threat of interference with the family, as opponents say – on the contrary, it is aimed at preserving the integrity of the social unit:

– If there is a conflict situation in the family, she will be provided with psychological or legal assistance. And if passions are already heated, then crisis centers will come to the rescue. And now we are dealing with facts of already committed violence, which could have been prevented.

Lawyer, co-author of the bill Alexey Parshin confirmed that the current Criminal Code does not work as prevention:

– Now, if the case is not initiated, there is no defense at all. And the bill provides protection in the form of protective orders.

The lawyer added that the bill does not provide for any forced removal of children from families, but the police will have additional tools that can be used when summoning a rowdy in the event that there is no violence yet, but there are facts of hooliganism, abuse, etc.

How will slander and perjury be prevented? The lawyer explained that the police would not write out a protective order from scratch, but after talking with witnesses, examining the traces of beatings, etc. The issued protection order can be appealed.

State Duma deputy, co-author of the bill Oksana Pushkina considers those who oppose the law to be extremists. Speaking about the essence of the document, Pushkina once again focused on the system of protection of victims of violence: these are two types of protection orders – extrajudicial, which is issued by a police officer, and judicial.

– In the existing laws there is an investigation of the fact of violence and punishment, but there is no prevention and protection, – says Pushkina, – and the prevention of domestic violence without protection cannot be.

Human rights activist, co-author of the bill Alena Popova insists on their “ideal version” of the bill, which is strikingly different from what is posted on the website of the Federation Council. Popova believes that the bill should include all types of domestic violence – along with physical violence, psychological, economic and sexual. “And God forbid, the word“ reconciliation ”will remain in the bill! – said the human rights activist.

It seems that there is still a long way to go to a consensus between the authors and opponents of the bill.