GLASNOST DEFENSE FOUNDATION DIGEST No. 473

TOPIC OF THE WEEK
Parliamentarian’s queer hobby

EVENT OF THE WEEK
Confrontation in “not free press” zone

RUSSIA
1. Voronezh. Editor fired, print run seized
2. Republic of Karelia. Judge bans audio recording of open hearing
3. Republic of Karelia. Newspaper wins judicial case
4. Krasnodar Region. Plaintiff turns out no “goody-goody”
5. Volgograd Region. No press service – no comment
6. Perm Region. Half a million claimed for… wrong font
7. Republic of Karelia. Minister claims he never threatened to “whack” anyone in the face. Continued from Digest 461
8. Samara Region. College of judges dismisses district newspaper editor. Continued from Digests 418, 441
9. Ivanovo. Court mitigates preventive measures against journalists suspected of corrupt practices

GLASNOST DEFENSE FOUNDATION
Some statistics cited

OUR PUBLICATIONS
Duma deputy condemns editor’s persecution for political reasons

OUR PARTNERS
Provintsiya Publishers’ wins court case against plagiarist newspaper

DIGEST MAIL
Statement by editor of newspaper Vecherny Murmansk

OUR ANNOUNCEMENT
Regional media again offered licensed software at discount

TOPIC OF THE WEEK

Parliamentarian’s queer hobby

Robert Schlegel of the State Duma’s Media Policy Committee, a former member of Nashi [a nationalist movement positioning itself as a youth wing of the ruling United Russia party (URP) – Translator.] notorious for his prior attempts to “correct” media legislation, has made a new appearance calling to pass amendments prohibiting the media to reproduce terrorist statements in any form. The bill he proposed says that “the circulation of any materials on behalf of wanted persons or those convicted on charges of involvement in terrorist activities shall be banned”.

Schlegel maintains that news about militants should be confined to reports about their physical elimination. “Their main goal is not to kill but to intimidate us; that is why the media should not allow themselves to be led by terrorists,” he said to Noviye Izvestia. The deputy believes that “people need to know who is to blame for a terrorist act, not why. The reason is a minor issue and people need not know it.”
 
As regards intimidation, the young URP activist must be pretending he fears what independent characteristics the press has retained up until now. Hence his numerous legislative initiatives aimed at toughening the Media Law. It is unclear, though, why this young man should take the liberty of deciding what we need to know and what we do not. Is this a sign of bad manners or lack of intellect?

“Robert is a very young, ecstatic and ambitious boy. He is notorious for his attempt – at the very beginning of his parliamentary career – to push through a bill that would allow the closure of a media outlet ‘for libel’ with no investigation or trial,” Novaya Gazeta cites deputy Boris Reznik as saying. Andrei Richter, head of the Media Law Institute, told NG that attempts to rewrite the Media Law signify a trend: “Each time a major terrorist act occurred, or an interview with [former Chechen President] Maskhadov was published, legislative initiatives of this kind were advanced and RosKomNadzor [federal agency supervising public communications] warnings were issued.” And GDF president Alexei Simonov went as far as advising Schlegel to “stop fussing about and stay away from things you know little of”.

It may be a kind of queer hobby with Schlegel to try amending media legislation time and again. But then, the young man would hardly ever start acting – of his own free will – like a puppy that chews on his master’s bed slippers. More likely, the former Nashi activist has been used for purposes of “sending up trial balloons”.

EVENT OF THE WEEK

Confrontation in “not free press” zone

The media freedom situation in Bashkortostan has always been problematic. All GDF surveys have invariably shown the press in the republic is “not free”. Quite surprisingly, it is in Bashkortostan, where freedom of expression seems to be a half-forgotten notion, journalists have come to grips with Eduard Yuldashev, head of the Press, Publishing and Printing Department of the republic’s government, and won: President Murtaza Rakhimov relieved Yuldashev of his official duties April 9.

This positive outcome was preceded by turbulent developments. A former police officer, Eduard Yuldashev was appointed the Press Department chief in July 2009 to immediately order a series of measures akin to police purges. As a result, dozens of department employees and nine editors-in-chief of district newspapers were fired – a move Yuldashev described as “natural” personnel rotation. There were other incidents, too. According to K. Nabiyev, editor of the newspaper Yuldash, at the very first meeting of the department board Yuldashev, with reference to the Guard Duty Code, likened editors to guard dogs that “need to be kept half-starving to perform well”. Naturally, statements of this kind were resented by the media community.

In late March 2010 Farit Akhmadiyev, president of the Bashkortostan Journalists’ Union and editor of Vatandash magazine, sent the republic’s President Murtaza Rakhimov an appeal to “protect Bashkortostan’s journalists from pressure by an ill-performing government official”. In response, the Press Department ordered an inspection of Akhmadiyev’s own performance that led to his dismissal on April 6.

It looked like the former police officer did not know any other methods of work.

But only three days later, E. Yuldashev himself was fired by President Rakhimov whom the Journalists’ Union had personally contacted in a bid to defend colleagues.

F. Akhmadiyev insists on his reinstatement as Vatandash editor-in-chief, questioning the Press Department’s right to order his dismissal. In an interview for Kommersant Daily, he said: “I was appointed editor by a government decree and my term of office has not yet expired.”

RUSSIA

1. Voronezh. Editor fired, print run seized

By Natalia Severskaya,
GDF staff correspondent in Central Federal District

On April 5 Dmitry Dyakov, editor-in-chief of the regional administration’s newspaper Voronezhsky Courier since 1992, was reassigned to head a printing house. His dismissal was accompanied by the confiscation of the latest issue’s print run.

On the following day, the VC staffers circulated a statement in the Internet that said, in part: “Voronezhsky Courier has a new editor-in-chief now. The regional government, the founder of our newspaper, has not explained this reshuffle in any way. Actually, we do not need any explanations because everything is clear as it is. VC was established and kept operating for a long time as an independent newspaper – one immune to the ruling elite’s diktat. With time, the boundaries of our freedom began to shrink, just as anywhere else in Russia. Nevertheless, even during the last few years we found ways to speak our mind – or, as a minimum, not to say things we did not think right. Maybe we are muddled or slow thinkers – but that, as it were, is a debatable point. Our message is different: we are convinced that Dmitry Dyakov was fired as an independent-minded person unwilling to dance to anyone’s tune... Now that regional power has again changed hands, decision-making is being done by people how know neither the Courier’s history nor its traditions. We want them to know that we find their decision to dismiss Dmitry Dyakov odious and abhorrent. There is one thing they could possibly do to reverse the situation – to reinstate Dyakov as VC editor-in-chief. Thereby they would show their strength, not weakness, because the greatest human strength is one’s ability to acknowledge and rectify his or her mistakes.”

Significantly enough, when firing the old editor and appointing the new one nobody ever asked the staffers’ opinion.

They wanted initially to publish the appeal in their own newspaper, and agreed on that with the new editor; but at the very last moment the issue already signed for printing was killed, Novaya Gazeta reports.

There has been some public reaction to D. Dyakov’s dismissal. The newspaper Kommuna published the VC staffers’ appeal; the school of journalism of Voronezh State University sent the regional governor a letter of solidarity with the colleague; and the local branch of the human rights organization Memorial said it would take a closer look at the incident.

The Glasnost Defense Foundation will follow the developments, too.


2. Republic of Karelia. Judge bans audio recording of open hearing

By Anatoly Tsygankov,
GDF staff correspondent in North-Western Federal District

The Journalists’ Union in Karelia has informed Boris Taratunin, chairman of the republic’s Supreme Court, of yet another instance of the Petrozavodsk city court’s infringing the lawful rights of a journalist: judge Yekaterina Stepanova demanded that Karelskaya Guberniya correspondent Nadezhda Mekkiyeva switch off her Dictaphone machine during an open hearing. After copying the recording to her PC system unit, the judge erased it from the journalist’s tape recorder.

The union’s statement points to the fact that the judge’s demand was unlawful, since Article 10.7 of the RF Code of Civil Law Procedure (“Openness of court hearings”) explicitly stipulates that persons involved in a civil law case, as well as those attending an open court hearing, are entitled to take notes or use tape recording devices to record the proceedings – with no authorization from the judge required. The latter is only needed if someone wants to take photo pictures, shoot video sequences, or conduct live radio or TV reporting. With all the restrictions confined to those above, the judge nevertheless – in violation of the law – prohibited the use of the Dictaphone by N. Mekkiyeva and even compelled the reporter to erase the recording already made.

The Journalists’ Union reminded B. Taratunin that it was not the first incident of its kind, which circumstance indicates that judges of the Petrozavodsk city court have systematically and deliberately infringed the lawful rights of journalists by interfering with their lawful professional activities. The union urged Karelia’s highest-ranking judge to “investigate the incident and duly inform the Journalists’ Union board of the findings”.


3. Republic of Karelia. Newspaper wins judicial case

By Anatoly Tsygankov,
GDF staff correspondent in North-Western Federal District

The newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets v Karelii (MKK) has won in court defending against Viktor Asanov, head of the Economics Department of the republican administration.

V. Asanov lodged his legal claim demanding a refutation of several passages in an article pointing to the spending of budgetary funds on putting up a high-voltage power line to supply electricity to the well-known recreational township of Shuiskaya Chupa. The plaintiff also claimed RUR 200,000 in moral damage compensation.

In the course of judicial proceedings it was confirmed that Asanov had received a former government dacha in Shuiskaya Chupa for “temporary” rent – until the year 2058 (actually, for lifetime use), and that MKK’s publication had been absolutely accurate. As a result, the high-ranking gubernatorial official’s legal claim was turned down.


4. Krasnodar Region. Plaintiff turns out no “goody-goody”

By Victoria Tashmatova,
GDF staff correspondent in Southern Federal District

A district court in the town of Primorsko-Akhtarsk, Krasnodar Region, has awarded District Council deputy Yevgeny Matviyenko RUR 50,000 in moral damage compensation payable by Anastasia Baranova, editor of the local independent newspaper Primorsko-Akhtarskiye Vesti (circulation 1,000), for an article titled “Brave Officers, or Two Men Against a Woman” that cited some facts from Matviyenko’s biography which he had personally made public in various prior media publications. The author took the liberty of questioning the accuracy of his biographic accounts and suggested that he might not be that “goody-goody” as he tried hard to portray himself to electors.

The plaintiff claimed offended by the “goody-goody” characteristic which he found ruinous to his honor, dignity and business reputation, and demanded RUR 500,000 in moral damage compensation. The court slashed the claimed amount by nine-tenths but still satisfied the claim – and this despite the defendant’s presenting conclusions by a linguistic expert who had found nothing insulting about that figure of speech.

A. Baranova intends to challenge the court decision before a higher-standing judicial authority because she says all the information cited in her publication was consistent with that contained in an official document – a leaflet calling on electors to vote for Matviyenko as a candidate for a seat on the district council. As for the phrase “goody-goody”, she insists it is no more than an evaluative opinion; each public figure should be ready to hear both positive and negative evaluations of his or her personality by electors and journalists.


5. Volgograd Region. No press service – no comment

By Dmitry Florin,
GDF staff correspondent in Central Federal District

On April 6, a correspondent for the Caucasian Knot news agency asked the Novoanninsky District police headquarters to comment on the March 31 detention of two girls from the Jehovah’s Witnesses community.

They were detained during a religious service, taken to the local police department, searched without a warrant, protocol or eyewitnesses, and kept in detention for about 10 hours, which was a flagrant violation of the law.

Calling the department on the phone, the correspondent contacted the duty officer who mumbled his name into the receiver, refusing to say it again distinctly. Having heard the journalist’s questions and verified what media outlet he represented, the police officer said his department could not provide any comment because it had no press service of its own. He did not indicate who of the PR officers was authorized to talk to reporters.


6. Perm Region. Half a million claimed for… wrong font

By Vassily Moseyev,
GDF staff correspondent in Volga Federal District

Three court sittings have been held in the district center of Ilyinsky, Perm Region, to hear a legal claim lodged by a local resident, Sergey Syropyatov, against the newspaper Znamya.

Last November, the newspaper published an ad saying that the district administration was determined to support small businesses and allocate funds to finance the implementation of business plans developed by local entrepreneurs. Wishing to minimize the publication costs for an old-time client, the newspaper had the ad printed in a small-size (9 pt.) font.

S. Syropyatov, who happens to be a visually handicapped person, failed to duly notice the ad and decided to sue.

During the first court sitting, editor Valery Simonov was shocked to learn that the plaintiff wanted RUR 500,000 (sic!) in moral damage compensation. Urged by the judge to end the conflict by reaching an amicable settlement, Syropyatov said no. It was only after the third hearing that his legal claim was finally turned down: the defendant presented a document proving that the choice of the font had been in line with the established norms. Yet the plaintiff said he would challenge the decision before the higher-standing regional court.

The whole thing might be written off as an amusing incident but for the time wasted and nervous strain suffered by the editor…


7. Republic of Karelia. Minister claims he never threatened to “whack” anyone in the face. Continued from Digest 461

By Anatoly Tsygankov,
GDF staff correspondent in North-Western Federal District

Housing and communal services conflicts between tenants and utility service providers being quite common in Russia, the fact that the Mikhailov family got electric power supply switched off after several months of non-payment would hardly ever surprise anyone if the incorrigible defaulter did not turn out to be Sergey Mikhailov, finance minister of Karelia. Naturally, the scandal has been receiving extensive coverage in the press.

The minister sued the newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets v Karelii (MKK) for reporting that he had been heard threatening to “whack” his house manager in the face for switching off electricity (see http://www.gdf.ru/digest/item/1/693#rus5 ). The relevant conversation between Mikhailov and an MKK reporter was heard by other journalists in the office (the telephone was in the speakerphone mode) but not tape recorded. The minister denied ever having said anything of the kind, and brought a witness – his deputy A. Moiseyev – to prove it. The deputy minister testified under an oath that he had been in the office during that telephone conversation but had not heard his boss threatening anyone.

The most essential question – why the finance minister’s family failed to duly pay for utility services – was not raised in court. Nor did Mikhailov deny the fact of his being in arrears with payment. The discussion only focused on a couple of phrases characterizing the degree of irritation the official had been in during the conversation. By the way, he lodged similar claims against another newspaper, Karelskaya Guberniya, which had reported the fact of his threatening the house manager (who confirmed that fact in court) and remarked that if some ordinary citizen had been in Mikhailov’s place, he or she would have been likely to be pressed hard to pay the debt, rather than be defended as vigorously as the minister was.

Judge E. Stepanova of the Petrozavodsk city court satisfied Mikhailov’s claim, requiring the two newspapers to publish refutations and pay him RUR 50,000 in moral damage compensation. Neither MKK nor Karelskaya Gubernia agreed with that decision and will appeal against it.


8. Samara Region. College of judges dismisses district newspaper editor. Continued from Digests 418, 441

By Viktor Sadovsky,
GDF staff correspondent in Volga Federal District

The civil law college of judges of the regional court in Samara has again – just as it did three years ago – supported the Sergiyevsky District administration’s decision to fire Alexander Popov whom the RF Supreme Court earlier reinstated de jure as editor-in-chief of the newspaper Selskaya Tribuna.

De facto, A. Popov never returned to the newspaper office where he had worked for more than twenty years – and this despite the Supreme Court’s canceling all judicial decisions passed in respect of him except that of February 16, 2007 allowing him to return to his former job (see http://www.gdf.ru/digest/item/1/520#rus4; http://www.gdf.ru/digest/item/1/636#rus4). The Samara court justified its latest decision by reference to the fact that Selskaya Tribuna was crossed out from the register of legal entities on July 10, 2007 (sic!).

This is a clear instance of juridical casuistry. The Supreme Court confirms the Sergiyevsky District court decision of February 16, 2007 reinstating Popov in his former position, which means local judges must cancel as unlawful Selskaya Tribuna’s deregistration as a legal entity. Yet Samara judicial officers stand their ground, actually ignoring, both de jure and de facto, the highest national court’s ruling. Alexander Popov has again stayed jobless since February 2, 2010.


9. Ivanovo. Court mitigates preventive measures against journalists suspected of corrupt practices

By Natalia Severskaya,
GDF staff correspondent in Central Federal District

According to the newspaper Ivanovo-Press, decisions were taken on March 24-26 canceling the house arrest of IvPress Ltd. founder and head Galina Yablokova, the newspaper’s editor-in-chief Valery Smetanin, and Galina’s son and author of a number of publications, Alexei Yablokov, all of whom are accused of illegally charging money for publications specially ordered by clients. Instead of the house arrest, they were required to give written pledges not to leave town.

The suspects say the charges brought against them were trumped up. As we have reported, on January 27 the Ivanovo-Press and IvPress Ltd. offices were searched, with documents and office equipment confiscated. On the same day, V. Smetanin, G. Yablokova and A. Yablokov were detained and placed in a pre-trial detention facility in Moscow. Initially, investigators insisted on their staying in prison but the court ruled for them to be kept under house arrest, which preventive measure, too, has now been mitigated.

Criminal proceedings against them were instituted on January 11. According to Ivanovo-Press, the operation involved police officers from two Moscow districts – the North-Western and Central. The question is why Moscow police should be concerned as much as they are with Ivanovo’s local problems…

GLASNOST DEFENSE FOUNDATION

Some statistics cited

Last week, the Glasnost Defense Foundation was referred to at least 15 in the Internet, including at:

http://www.newizv.ru/news/2010-04-07/124717/
http://barentspress.org/ru/default.asp?lesmer=1240
http://barentspress.org/ru/default.asp?lesmer=1233
http://www.permoboz.ru/txt.php?n=7489
http://www.civitas.ru/news.php?code=8850
http://www.polit.ru/news/2010/04/06/simoshleg.html@1319
http://www.vdvsn.ru/papers/vs/2010/03/25/79532/
http://www.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/167482/
http://media-day.ru/mixed/2810/
http://www.lenizdat.ru/a0/ru/pm1/c-1088149-0.html#1
http://www.asi.org.ru/ASI3/rws_asi.nsf/va_WebPages/8DD648CEB2BB1348C32576FF004AD159Rus
http://www.newizv.ru/news/2010-04-12/124977/

OUR PUBLICATIONS

Duma deputy condemns editor’s persecution for political reasons

By Anna Lebedeva,
GDF staff correspondent in Southern Federal District

State Duma deputy Mikhail Yemelyanov, who is also head of the Rostov regional branch of the Fair Russia party, has made public a statement about Lydia Rtishcheva, editor of the newspaper Spravedlivaya Rossiya na Donu (SRD), being the subject of persecution for political motives. The statement followed a press release by the regional prosecutor’s office saying it intended to institute criminal proceedings against Rtishcheva, former director and editor of the regional newspaper Molot, on charges of office abuse. The findings of a prosecutorial checkup have been submitted to the Central Investigations Department of the regional police.

The checkup was held as early as last November but its results were announced only a short time ago. Prior to that, the newspaper’s financial performance had been audited by the regional Chamber of Accounts at the Press Department’s request.

“That was not a regular audit; it was held in response to an info issued by the regional administration’s press spokesperson that said ‘the newspaper feels free to feature negative assessments of the situation in Rostov Region, or place otherwise objective reports under provocative headings’. The newspaper was reprimanded for featuring official congratulations to regional leaders or reports about their participation in various events not on the first but on the second page, in the rubric ‘Government and Society’. Besides, two anonymous reports about Rtishcheva’s ‘poor’ performance were sent to the governor; when Press Department head Nadezhda Babich attempted to read one of those to the Molot staffers, the latter stopped her from doing so,” the statement says.

According to Yemelyanov, the persecution campaign against Molot’s editor (involving unfair accusations and repeated sudden inspections) has been conducted by the head of the supervisory department ever since Rtishcheva’s appointment to that position in 2005. “The more the newspaper met modern requirements, the more claims were advanced against it. This became particularly evident after the Molot Plus project was presented at a meeting of district newspaper editors, promising to seriously impact the situation in the regional media area toughly controlled by N. Babich. The pressure campaign ended up in Rtishcheva’s replacement with a Press Department appointee, and in sanctions ordered against the journalists who had urged the governor to protect their colleague,” the statement says.

After the ex-editor of Molot became the SRD editor-in-chief and released three issues of the newspaper, two of them during the latest municipal elections, the results of the prosecutorial checkup were made known to the public. Yemelyanov insists there were no “black” or “grey” payment schemes and that Rtishcheva inherited the transparent system of royalty payments to newspaper directors and editors that had been in use since 1998, with payment reports duly sent to the controlling bodies.

Press Department head Nadezhda Babich denies that the case has any political underpinnings. Commenting on Yemelyanov’s statement, she urged the author “to regard the situation from a legal, rather than political, angle, with reliance on the legal education you have received”.

OUR PARTNERS

Provintsiya Publishers’ wins court case against plagiarist newspaper

The regional arbitration court of Smolensk has ruled for the publishers of Novoye Nikolskoye Koltso (NNK) either to have their newspaper reregistered under a different name or to leave the media market.

NNK hit the press kiosks on July 13, 2009 – at a time when the weekly Nikolskoye Koltso had already been released by Protintsiya Publishers’ for eight years. The publishing company’s management filed a legal claim to protect the well-publicized brand from abuse by profit-thirty plagiarists. On the one hand, the “clone” newspaper was claiming access to Provintsiya’s pool of advertisers and distributors; on the other, it might ruin the original newspaper’s and entire publishing company’s reputation by pursuing an editorial policy that differs from Provintsiya’s.  

The plagiarists vigorously defended their position. They pressed for linguistic and socio-psychological expert studies to be ordered, and tried to prove in court that the readers and distributors could not possibly mix up the two newspapers’ names, even though these sounded alike. “Yet the court passed a decision of April 2, 2010 requiring the defendants to stop using the brand name Nikolskoye Koltso for commercial purposes,” Provintsiya’s lawyer Filipp Ukhanov said. “This means they will either have to reregister their newspaper under a different name with the regional department of RosKomNadzor [agency in charge of public communications] or give up its release altogether.” The court decision is to come into full legal force 30 days after its passing in the present form or after a court of appeals rules on the case otherwise. While Nikolskoye Koltso is waiting for full justice to be done, NNK continues to be distributed in violation of the law.

[Provintsiya Publishers’ press service, April 6, 2010]

DIGEST MAIL

Statement by editor of newspaper Vecherny Murmansk

This is to inform you of an attempt to impose censorship and exert pressure on the editor of the newspaper Vecherny Murmansk as she was preparing for printing the April 6th issue of VM, the official newspaper of the local self-government of the city of Murmansk.

At 4 p.m. on Monday, April 5, I was summoned to the office of S. Subbotin, head of the municipal administration, who demanded that I edit out a story about the executive authorities’ failure to comply with a RF government decision requiring the sums charged from residents for central heating in 2009 to be recalculated. The story had already been proof-read and fully set up for printing. Moreover, it had been pre-announced in the previous VM issue of April 2. Actually, it was a transcript of Gorodskiye Vesti [City News] TV show of April 3 during which City Council deputies, experts and ordinary citizens had criticized the administration for its inaction as regards recalculating the central heating amounts payable. S. Subbotin urged me not to publish the transcript, threatening otherwise to fire me and liquidate my newspaper, or forcibly give me a leave from work with his own appointee replacing me as editor-in-chief. He went as far as offering me money for staying away as long as needed. Finding myself pressured as hard as that, I was compelled to cancel the story’s publication. Meanwhile, in line with Article 18 of the federal Media Law, a media outlet’s founder is not entitled to interfere with editorial activities. And Article 58 defines the legal sanctions to which a person may be subjected for meddling in professional journalistic work. Considering such pressure on me as editor-in-chief as described above unacceptable, I hereby ask you to interfere and protect me and the entire staff of Vecherny Murmansk from pressure and threats coming from municipal administration head S. Subbotin.

N. G. Chervyakova,
editor-in-chief, newspaper Vecherny Murmansk

OUR ANNOUNCEMENT

Regional media again offered licensed software at discount

The Guild of Periodical Press Publishers has reached a new agreement with Microsoft and Adobe on the sale of licensed software to the regional media at discounts.

The Guild members from the number of regional media filing purchase orders before April 30 will be offered up to 80-percent discounts from the regular price of this kind of software packages. The program is being supported by the Communications Ministry and expected to keep expanding.

It may be noted here that the previous campaign to provide the Russian media with licensed software on beneficial terms was initiated by the RF Journalists’ Union. Microsoft, one of the campaign participants, sold its software packages at such large discounts for the first time ever. The expired campaign imposed no restrictions on journalists as regards their JU membership, and covered the entire country.

The latest Guild action is to be comprehensively encouraged and supported, if only because of the large number of legal charges brought against media outlets by the law enforcers for the use of counterfeit software. Sometimes, those charges have been used as a pretext for exerting pressure on disfavored journalists – and this despite Microsoft’s and other software developers’ repeated denials of their involvement in media harassment actions (see http://www.gdf.ru/digest/item/7/257#pub).

This Digest has been prepared by the Glasnost Defense Foundation (GDF), http://www.gdf.ru.

We appreciate the support of the John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
Digest released once a week, on Mondays, since August 11, 2000.
Distributed by e-mail to 1,600 subscribers in and outside Russia.

Editor-in-chief: Alexei Simonov

Editorial board: Boris Timoshenko – Monitoring Service chief, Pyotr Polonitsky – head of GDF regional network, Svetlana Zemskova – lawyer, Vsevolod Shelkhovskoy – translator, Alexander Yefremov – web administrator in charge of Digest distribution.


We would appreciate reference to our organization in the event of any Digest-sourced information or other materials being used.

Contacts: Glasnost Defense Foundation, 4, Zubovsky Boulevard, Office 432, 119992 Moscow, Russia.
Telephone/fax: (495) 637-4947, 637-4420, e-mail: boris@gdf.ru, fond@gdf.ru
To be crossed out from the Digest list of subscribers, please e-mail a note to fond@gdf.ru .

← Все новости