20 March 2026

by Teresa Cherfas

Welcome to the second part of the 40th edition of the Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas 

Today, we continue Tanya’s story from Mariupol. In the first part, we left her with her granddaughter in Krasnodar. Many moves lay ahead before they finally found a more permanent refuge in England.

This podcast was recorded on 13 March 2026

My questions:

• In the last episode, you told us how you and your granddaughter reached Krasnodar. How did you leave Russia? And how did you end up in England?
• Do you keep in touch with friends and neighbours who still live in Mariupol?
• Do you dream of ever returning home?
• What kind of future would you like to see for Ukraine?

Welcome to the 40th edition of the Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas

Our latest episode is devoted to the story of a grandmother from Mariupol, who left her home three days after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. At that time she thought the bombing would end and she’d be back home in a couple of weeks. Four years and counting, she still hasn’t been home. Our guest today will talk about those events and memories of her flight from Mariupol. Her name is Tanya. This podcast was recorded on 12 March 2026

My Questions:

• When Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, you were living in Mariupol where you had spent your whole life. What happened that made you decide to leave your home of so many years?
• What are your most vivid memories of that time, after you left your home?

Welcome to the 39th edition of the Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. Among the first guests on the podcast was Dmitry Oreshkin, the well-known political scientist. At that time we talked with him about the significance for Russia of that fateful day – 24 February – when Putin launched his war of aggression against the sovereign state of Ukraine.

Today, on the eve of the fourth anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine, we have invited Dmitry Borisovich on to the podcast again, this time to comment on the progress of Putin’s war and to talk about the current state of Russia against the backdrop of a rapidly changing world and shift in global politics.

A geographer by education, Oreshkin has extensive experience as a professional observer of the political, economic and social life of Russia today.

This podcast was recorded on 12 February 2026

My Questions

1. A report published last month by the think tank Centre for Strategic and International Studies claimed that since February 2022, Russian troops have suffered nearly 1.2 million casualties, more than any major power in any war since World War II. What do Russians still in Russia think about how the war is going?

2. How is the war affecting people’s daily lives?

3. When Donald Trump ran for president of the United States, he promised to conclude a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine within 24 hours. A year later, how do you assess Trump’s efforts to reach a peace agreement?

4. The well-known Ukrainian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Oleksandra Matviichuk recently asked a question on social media: “ Why has Trump’s year of negotiations been the deadliest for civilians in Ukraine since the full-scale invasion? The number of deaths and injuries has increased by 31 percent compared to the previous year.

Why did Putin not allow himself such brutal strikes on civilian infrastructure under Biden, whom Trump calls ‘weak,’ but totally destroys peaceful cities and disregards the ‘strong Trump’?” How would you answer her?

5. The same think tank I mentioned earlier ranks Russia as a second or third world country in terms of its economy. Can Putin continue the war indefinitely without fear that the economic consequences will be devastating for Russia?

6. Trump’s indecisiveness regarding Ukraine contrasts sharply with the US operation to capture Venezuelan President Maduro a few weeks ago. How do you think Putin and the Kremlin perceived Trump’s boldness regarding Venezuela?

7. This was followed by Trump’s demand to incorporate Greenland into the US. How did the Kremlin react to Trump’s declamatory speech in Davos and his subsequent climb-down when he saw the strength of opposition to his plan?

8. Many believe Trump is not interested in helping Ukraine and thinks this conflict is a problem that America’s European allies should resolve. What would that mean for Ukraine?

9. If Europe does not unite decisively to defend Ukraine, will Putin continue, say, with an attack on the Baltic states?

10. The real rival of the United States today is, of course, China. How would you describe Putin’s relationship with President Xi Jinping? Do Putin’s nuclear weapons compensate for Russia’s economic weakness in its own relations with China?

11. Many people are talking about the collapse of the rules-based old world order. Do you agree with this interpretation? How do you think the situation will develop over the next few years? How will this affect Putin’s future actions?

19 January 2026

by Teresa Cherfas

Welcome to the 38th edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. 

My guest today, Mikhail Fishman, is known to viewers of the independent television channel TV Rain as the host of his own weekly political programme, I Tak Dalee [‘And So On’]. Since the late 1990s, he has served as editor-in-chief of the Russian edition of Newsweek and also worked for The Moscow Times, where he covered the turbulent political developments of the newly created Russian Federation. In 2022, his book Preemnik [The Successor] about the life and times of Boris Nemtsov was published in Russia. The book became a bestseller. Fishman was motivated to write his book after collaborating with documentary film-maker, Vera Krichevskaya, on her 2016 film about Boris Nemtsov, The Man Who Was Too Free. Four years on, it has now been published in English translation under the title The Successor. Mikhail Fishman is with me today to talk about his book. 

This podcast was recorded on 19 January 2026.

My questions

3 December 2025

by Teresa Cherfas

Welcome to the 37th edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas.

Maria Alekhina, is a founding member of the Pussy Riot art collective. Pussy Riot’s performance, in February 2012, when they sang their Punk Prayer in the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow, led to the arrest of three of them, including Alekhina herself.  They were sentenced to two years in a penal colony.

Olga Borisova, is also a member of Pussy Riot, but joined much later. 

Political Girl:Life and Fate in Russia is Maria Alekhina’s account of the years since her release in 2014 up until she left Russia shortly after the invasion of Ukraine.  Olga Borisova helped in the writing of it.  Their book was recently published in English translation in the United Kingdom. 

We are indebted to Emily Eccles, the translator of Political Girl, for facilitating this podcast with Maria and Olga.

This podcast was recorded on 30 November 2025. Photo credit: Pussy Riot.

Teresa's Questions:

• How did you become a “Political Girl”? Were you born a “political girl,” or did life make you one?
• Olga, what about you? Tell us about your path to Pussy Riot. (How did you become friends with Masha?)
• Masha, is it true that you and your two other Pussy Riot offenders were the first political prisoners in Putin’s Russia? Was it a shock for you to be arrested and sentenced?
• Why is feminism such an important element of Pussy Riot’s philosophy? And why is it so threatening to an authoritarian regime? (Feminism is a ‘mortal sin,’ according to the judge at your trial.)
• Masha, you wrote that when you were released from prison a couple of months early, thanks to Putin’s amnesty before the Olympic Games in Sochi, you found yourself in a different country. Please explain.
• Tell us about your performance in Sochi with other members of Pussy Riot, very soon after your release. 
• Masha, you travelled to Kyiv to show solidarity with the Maidan protesters in 2014. How do you explain the difference between Ukrainians and Russians — why is it that Russians seem more passive and don’t protest en masse?
• Your book describes the constant surveillance, humiliation, persecution, and repression that accompanied you everywhere and always. Where did you find the strength to continue resisting the authorities?
• Do revolutionaries have special qualities? Would you describe yourself as a ‘revolutionary’, Masha? What about you, Olya?
• What is it that motivates you and makes you willing to sacrifice so much for? 
• I hadn’t realised that Pussy Riot created Mediazona, an independent media outlet. How does it differ from other independent media outlets? What is its mission?
• You have often said that Putin’s third term as president was a point of no return for Russia. How did this happen, in your view?
• Your book is in English and seems to be written for a Western readership. What are the main things you wanted to convey or communicate to the West? 
• The book has an entire chapter about the seemingly endless cycle of arrests and detentions you experienced. (You found both “good” and “bad” people among those who guarded you.) You have said that the whole of Russia can be found in these detention centres. What did you mean by that?
• When did you realize that there would be a full-scale war with Ukraine? Tell us about your thoughts in February 2022. 
• How did you decide whether to stay or leave?
• It has been more than three years since you arrived in the West. How do you perceive the actions of Western countries towards Russia?
• And how do you see their actions to defend their own democracy?
• Do you believe in change in Russia? What kind of change?
• Exactly ten years after your performance of the “Punk Prayer” in the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow, Putin announced the ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine. It seems that the Pussy Riot affair became a marker of what could be expected from Putin’s Russia: first there was the illegal annexation of Crimea, then increasingly harsh punitive measure against any dissent from the regime, and finally the full-scale war against Ukraine. What does it feel like to be a historical figure?

Welcome to the 35th edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas

Our guest today is actor and theatre director Alexander Molochnikov.

In this podcast we are making a break from our usual Russian-language format. This is because our guest has chosen not to speak in his mother tongue. At the age of just 22, he was the youngest director ever to stage a production at the legendary Moscow Arts Theatre. In 2022, aged 29, he had two productions running concurrently on two different stages of the Bolshoi Theatre – one a comic opera, the other a ballet based on Chekhov’s Seagull, for which he won the Golden Mask award. Then on 24th February, 2022, Putin invaded Ukraine…

His latest production, Seagull: True Story – a play that is so meta it has your head spinning – is currently on tour in London from New York. He has described it as his third Seagull, but only the second to fly.

This podcast was recorded on 2 October 2025.

[You can find on the Internet two recent Russian-language interviews Alexander Molochnikov has given to Yury Dud and Mikhail Zygar.]

Questions

• This podcast is about the time before and after the so-called Special Military Operation. What do you remember about the 24th of February 2022?
• You’ve described your current production in London – Seagull: True Story – as your third Seagull, but only the second to fly. What happened to the one that never took off?
• When did you decide you could no longer live in Russia?
• This is the first time we’ve done this podcast for Rights in Russia with a native Russian speaker in English. Is your decision not to speak Russian a political statement?
• What happened to your stage productions that were still in repertoire in Moscow after you left?
• Unlike many of your compatriots in the arts, you had a plan. What was that plan?
• You were a student at Columbia University in New York. What were your impressions of classes there?
• How did these experiences at Columbia inform the rehearsal process for your latest production: “Seagull: True Story”? How did you work with the actors to build the story and write the script?
• In Seagull: True Story, you make the point that the profit margin and commercial viability dictate what gets produced on stage in America and that that is every bit as restrictive on artistic expression as political censorship in Russia. What is your own personal experience of this in New York?
• I completely loved the theatricality of Seagull: True Story – it had an energy and a playfulness, using movement, mime, and props that made it an unmistakably theatrical experience. What is your experience of watching or taking part in theatre productions in the States, or indeed, London since you’re here?
• There’s a fantastic and surreal scene in it, where Putin, bare-chested on a horse appears to Kon, the director, in his dreams. And yet, there’s no Trump anywhere and no overt mention of the parallels between Putin’s Russia and Trump’s America.
• Do you think such parallels can be drawn?
• Kon, your alter-ego, if you like, is desperate to go back to Russia, to visit his mum, to mourn the death of his close friend, who died in a penal colony for speaking out against the war, but he can’t. It’s actually a very moving scene. Do you wish you could go back to Russia for a visit?
• On the one year anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia, you posted on social media: “A year ago, at 6:30 a.m., I wrote: “Forgive us.” Today I know you won’t forgive me. I’m 30, I plan to live another 50-70, and I believe I’ll see the day when you will forgive me.” What makes you think that?
• What’s up next for you after Seagull: True Story? Where do you see yourself, professionally, in 10 or 20 years?

In December 2021, a few months before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ordered the shutting down of Memorial, Russia’s oldest and largest human rights organisation. On 3 March 2022, Davidis appeared as a witness for the defence in the trial of Aleksei Navalny. On 4 March, security forces raided and ransacked the organisation’s Moscow office. A few days later, due to the increasing risks and virtual impossibility of continuing his work in support of political prisoners in Russia, Davidis decided to leave the country with his family. He currently lives in Lithuania. Together with his team, they track the number of political prisoners in Russia, organise support, and maintain a register according to the stringent standards adopted by Memorial.

This podcast was recorded on 25 September 2025.

Other platforms where you can find our podcasts include: Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes, and Amazon Audible.

My Questions

1 Could you tell us about the history of your project. When did Memorial decide that it was necessary to keep a record of all those individuals you consider to be political prisoners?

2 How do you define political prisoners? As you know, other organisations use other terms – for example Amnesty International refers to ‘prisoners of conscience’? What is the difference?

3 How many political prisoners are there in Russia at the moment?

4 My understanding is that under Gorbachev, all political prisoners were released and there were none under Yeltsin. When did political prisoners first reappear in Russia?

5 Two new laws in particular were introduced at the very start of the war criminalising ‘discrediting’ the Russian military or spreading ‘fake news’ about the Russian military. Could you explain the difference between those two laws and the differences in punishments?

6  read that some individuals are given ridiculously long terms in prison for an action which even in terms of Russian legislation would seem to be a minor offence – for example 13 years in prison for donating a small sum to a Ukrainian charity. That is far more than someone would get for murder. How do you explain that?

7 Russia these days has a whole range of laws criminalising individuals and organisations, for example the foreign agent laws, the laws branding organisations as extremist or as ‘undesirable’. How far are those convicted under these laws represented among those you classify as political prisoners?

8 To what extent is criticism of the Russian leader – Vladimir Putin – criminalised? Are people in prison simply for speaking out against Putin? That would tell us a great deal about the regime, given how focused it is on the personality of the leader?

9 If we consider Russia as an authoritarian state, in terms of the numbers of political prisoners in the country and the severity of the sentences, how does Russia compare with other authoritarian countries?

10 Your colleague Oleg Orlov was imprisoned for calling the regime ‘fascist’. Do you agree with that classification?

11 How much harder is it to do your work, based outside the country?

12 To what extent are you able to gauge the impact of your work, both inside Russia and internationally?

18 July 2025

by Teresa Cherfas

Welcome to the 33rd edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas

On 15 July 2009, Chechen human rights activist and member of the management committee of the human rights organization “Memorial,” Natalia Estemirova, was murdered. She was abducted near her home in Grozny and taken by car across the border to Ingushetia, where she was shot five times in the chest. The killers fled, leaving her body at the scene of the crime. Her only child was 15 years old. That child recently published a book about her mother, Please Live, and its author is our guest today – Lana Estemirova. 

My Questions

• Our podcast is called Then and Now, and most often it’s about how the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia has impacted people’s lives and perceptions. You wrote in your book that few people cared about your mother’s murder, or the Russian-Chechen wars, or the constant human rights violations, and that all these were but brief mentions at the end of the news, or cursory minutes of international meetings, if at all. By the time Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022, you wrote, it was too late. What does that date mean for you now?
• In your book, you write warmly about your relatives in Russia and in Chechnya. Are you in touch with them?  Is there a difference between Chechens’ and Russians’ perceptions of the war in Ukraine?
• I imagine it cannot have been easy to write your book. What was the process of writing like? Did you struggle to find your voice?
• How would you describe your mother to people who didn’t know her?
• Your mother’s close friend, Anna Politkovskaya, was killed in the entrance to her apartment building in Moscow in 2006. Do you remember that day? Were you worried about your mother and her safety?
• Your book clearly outlines the stages of the Chechen wars and of Ramzan Kadyrov’s rise to power. How did you feel about him and his influence on your lives? I’m thinking about your protest against compulsory headscarves for schoolgirls, for example.
• Two days ago was the anniversary of the murder of your mother, Natalia Estemirova. The title of your book, Please Live, is a direct reference to that day.  I read your account of how you learned of your mother’s death , about your reactions and emotions on the day and the  immediate aftermath, and of how they changed and evolved over time, of your rage and sadness and your final acceptance of what had happened. These are almost indescribable feelings, and yet you describe them in unforgettable language. What were the most important lessons for you?. After all, the last sentence of your book is: “Happiness is victory.” What did you mean by that?
• You recently became a mother yourself. Tell us about your feelings toward your baby daughter. What will you tell her about her grandmother?

You can read Teresa Cherfas’ review of Please Live. The Chechen Wars, My Mother and Me by Lana Estemirova here. 

Welcome to the 32nd edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. Today’s episode illustrates like nothing else the difference between ‘Then and Now’ in Russia.  It concerns the transformation of an entire generation into an instrument of patriotism and militarism in support of Putin’s Russia. In January this year, the documentary film Mr. Nobody Against Putin premiered at America’s prestigious Sundance Film Festival. The film is set in School No. 1 in Karabash, a small town in the industrial Ural region with a population of 10,000 and an average life expectancy of just 38 years. The film offers a fly-on-the-wall glimpse of Z-patriotism in Putin’s Russia and shows how the education and propaganda machine works in one individual school. The hero of the film, and its co-director, is our guest today. He is the Mr. Nobody of the title.  Welcome to our podcast,  Pavel Talankin! 

This podcast was recorded on 12 June 2025

My Questions

• First of all, I would like to thank you for your important and courageous film. For those who have not yet seen the film, please tell us how it came to be made.
• You worked as the events organiser, as well as part-time videographer, at School No. 1 in Karabash, your hometown. What role does the school play in the town? What kind of town is Karabash?
• As I understand it, you yourself graduated from this very school. Why did you decide to return to work there? What did you like about your job?
• In the film, you say you always felt lonely and different from other people. In what ways?
• You created an especially open atmosphere in your office, where students came to relax.  Tell us about it.
• How has school life changed since Putin announced the special military operation in February 2022? How quickly did things change at the school?  And in the town?
• What were the new directives from the Ministry of Education? Did you have to change how you work?
• There is a revealing scene in the film where a teacher cannot pronounce the words “demilitarization” and “denazification” in front of the children—she cannot do it, and you correct her…
• And there is another teacher, a history teacher, who follows the new guidelines perfectly…
• You wanted to quit your job. Why?
• When did you realise that the footage you had shot could be important evidence of these changes in school life?
• Tell us about the working relationship you developed with your creative partner during filming.
• Did you have like-minded people around you with whom you could share your ideas? Or whom you could trust to film you for the movie? There are quite a few shots of you that someone else must have filmed.
• For the viewer, the speed with which the students adopt their new skills in patriotic events, lessons, songs, and morning flag ceremonies is striking. The school changes before our eyes—the children are becoming different. How did you experience these changes yourself? And what about in your relationships at school? And in the town? Did it affect your work on the film?
• We see how, at a teachers’ meeting, teachers find out that the school’s academic ranking has dropped, that they are not managing to allocate enough time and resources to traditional teaching. What do you think this tells us about values in Putin’s Russia?
• In September 2022, President Putin announced a partial mobilization. Did this affect the mood and atmosphere at school? And in the wider town?
• When did you decide that you needed to leave Russia? Was it a difficult decision for you? After all, your much- loved mother worked at the same school as a librarian, and you couldn’t even tell her what you were planning to do.
• As the school’s event organizer, you organized the “Last Bell” graduation ceremony. You gave a speech in which every word seemed to be meant not only for the graduates but also for you, knowing that tomorrow would be your last day in your hometown. Everyone was crying, the children, the parents, and even the history teacher. What do you remember about that day?
• Are you aware of what happened at the school, and in Karabash as a whole, after you left Russia?
• What does love for your homeland mean to you?
• What do you wish for your film?

Welcome to the 31st edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now. Our latest guest is Marina Sapritsky-Nahum, a social anthropologist and author of the book Jewish Odesa, published in 2024 by Indiana University Press. The book explores issues of identity and tradition in the Jewish community in modern Odesa. Marina is currently a visiting fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the LSE.

In a review of Jewish Odesa, Lucy Lopata-Varkas writes:

‘Marina Sapritsky-Nahum’s Jewish Odesa is a compelling exploration of Jewishness in Odesa against the backdrop of Soviet history, Ukrainian nation-making, and ongoing European Jewish revivals. Drawing on an abundance of materials from history, oral testimonies, anthropology, and Jewish studies, Sapritsky-Nahum depicts a vibrant community whose connection to the port city never falters, despite waves of emigration to countries like Israel or the US, the changing political status quo, and fluctuating levels of religious observance.’ 

This podcast was recorded on 15 May 2025

My questions:

• What led you to make a study of Jewish Odesa in the early years of the 21st century?
• Did your own background influence your choice? Tell us a little about your own roots.
• How does the approach of a social anthropologist differ from that of a historian in the study of a subject such as this?
• The book begins with the stories and memories of an older generation of Jewish Odesans, those who grew up in the Soviet era. What did you learn from them? What defines them as Jews in their own eyes?  And in the eyes of others?
• Is oral history a useful tool in this kind of research?  In the book, you write: ‘collecting the life stories of elderly Jewish Odesans is one of my most cherished memories’… What did you personally gain from talking to them?
• After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was a widespread resurgence of interest in religion. How did this manifest itself in Odesa after Ukraine declared its own independence in 1991? Was it a genuine Jewish revival?
• Odesa occupies a special place in Jewish history and in the history of the Russian Empire and of the Soviet Union. How did this come about and what is the essence of Odesa’s identity as a Jewish city?
• In the book you talk about traditions. This makes me think of the song ‘Tradition’ from the musical ‘Fiddler on the Roof’ based on the stories of Sholem Aleichem, a native of Odesa. Sholem Aleichem, Isaac Babel, Leonid Utesov, Mikhail Zhvanetsky and many other Jewish Odesans gave the city its special character. How would you describe this special character?
• You write about the myth of Odesa – in what sense is it a myth? Can this myth survive the current war with Russia?
• You completed your research for the book before the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Are you still in touch with your interviewees? How has Russian aggression changed relations between different ethnic groups in Odesa? Is there a perceived threat to the Jews, since they were always associated with Russian culture and language?
• There is a lot of controversy and debate surrounding the issue of monuments in Odesa. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, monuments were erected to famous Jews from Odesa, including the mythical Sashka and Rabinovich of Soviet-era jokes. Are they still standing? What about monuments related to Russian culture, such as the one to Pushkin, or to Catherine the Great (the founder of Odesa) and others? What does it say about modern Odesa?
• In 2023, UNESCO designated Odesa a world heritage city. What do you think prompted this decision, and how will it benefit the city’s residents?
• What has been the impact on the sense of identity of Odesa’s Jews of post-Soviet research into the part played by some Ukrainians during World War II?  I’m thinking of Ukrainian collaboration with the Nazis, involvement in the Holocaust and in particular in the atrocity of  Babi Yar?
• Are you planning to write a sequel to Jewish Odesa? About the impact of the current war on Jewish life in Odesa? Do you have any thoughts on what your findings might reveal that you could share with us?

Welcome to the 30th edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. Since the very first episode of this podcast, ‘Then and Now’ has referred to the rupture in people’s lives caused by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Today, ‘Then and Now’ is equally applicable to the havoc raised in people’s lives across the world, as a result of President Trump’s first few months in office in his second term.

On 15 March, the Trump administration announced that it was freezing funding for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, including its Russian Service. Since the Cold War, Radio Liberty has broadcast in Russian, among other languages, and has played a significant role in spreading democratic values and an understanding of human rights in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, including Russia, of course. President Trump’s decision to freeze Radio Liberty’s budget will deal a serious blow to Russian-speaking listeners in Russia and elsewhere.

My guest today is Andrey Shary, head of Radio Liberty’s Russian Service in Prague. 

This podcast was recorded on 10 April 2025

My questions

• President Trump doesn’t always cite accurate data when he announces a new White House initiative. Tell us about the resources and the current work of Radio Liberty’s Russian Service. How many hours does it broadcast and on what platforms? How many staff does it employ and what is the size of its audience? What is your budget?
• What is the current situation with the implementation of President Trump’s executive order? We know that on 25 March a U.S. District Judge issued a restraining order that delayed the immediate shutdown of RFE’s operations.
• Tell us about the Czech Government’s initiative to save Radio Liberty.  We also know that there have been motions put forward for the EU to intervene with support for Radio Liberty.
• What plans for saving Radio Liberty do you think are most promising among those being discussed in Prague right now. 
• How do you personally feel about what is happening now? Do you see a possible way out of the situation?
• What role can Radio Liberty play in a world in which America has abandoned its traditional role as leader of the free world?
• Tell us a little about your own work at Radio Liberty – you’ve been working there for many years. What are some of your most memorable moments and impressions?
• When President Putin announced the start of the ‘special military operation’ in February 2022, how did you, as head of Radio Liberty’s Russian Service, respond? Did you set yourself new directives and objectives? Did you create new radio or online projects?
• What can you tell us about listeners’ feedback? Have you seen a rise in demand for Radio Liberty’s broadcast and online content since the start of the war with Ukraine? Which formats are most in demand among listeners?
• Perhaps the most important goal of Radio Liberty, established during the Cold War, was to demonstrate why democracy and freedom are worth fighting for. Do you believe that there’s still an audience for those ideals in Putin’s Russia now?
• Today, we see the suppression of democracy and democratic values in both Russia and America. Democracy is threatened by populist tendencies around the world, including in Europe, undermined by disinformation and all kinds of so-called hybrid warfare. What role can Radio Liberty play in this ideological war?

My guest today is Alissa Timoshkina.  Originally from Omsk in Siberia, Alyssa left Russia to study in England at the age of 15.  She has been living and working in London ever since. She is the author of two cookery books – but cookery books with a difference.  The first came out six years ago and is called Salt and Time: recipes from a Russian Kitchen, and the second about the cuisine of Eastern Europe, was published more recently and is called simply Kapusta.  Between publication of her first and second book, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. For Alissa, 24 February 2022 really did cut her life in two: “Then and Now”. In our podcast she explains why.

This podcast was recorded on 13 March 2025

My Questions

• Do you remember how you felt on the day Russia invaded Ukraine three years ago?
• You took a decision to help Ukrainians.  Tell us about this initiative.
• What does home cooking mean for you?  What are your most vivid memories from childhood? 
• Were there any particular dishes you made for yourself in England as a teenager when you were missing family back home, to remind you of them? 
• The title of your second book is Kapusta.  What associations does this word have for you?
• You write in your book that food is the language of unity.  But there are no recipes from Russia in the book.  Even familiar recipes like borscht or sauerkraut or potato fritters are attributed to other countries or peoples.  Why is that?
• If you were to hold your first book, about Russian cuisine, in your hands today, what would your thoughts be? 
• When did you first realise that you were Jewish? What does it mean to you?
• You have written that your favourite pursuits are history and cooking. How have you  managed to combine them in your professional life?
• Do you think of Russia as your Motherland? Or is that no longer possible for you?

My questions

• Tell us a little bit about yourself, about your family. What has been important to you in your life? What moral principles have you followed.
• You are a mathematician and educator. Tell us about your professional career in Russia and how it developed.
• What was your inspiration when you decided to found your private school – Moscow School Workshop – in Moscow? How did it differ from state schools?
• Could you have imagined that your professional world could experience a complete collapse so quickly and irrevocably?
• Why did you decide to leave Russia? When you learned war had broken out – what did you think and when did you make the decision to leave and why? What was your main fear and your main reason?
• Tell us how it was. You have, after all, four children….
• What is the fate of the children who studied with you at the Moscow Workshop School? And your teachers?
• You and your family now live in Berlin. Tell us about the journey that took you there…
• You joined the Russian Lyceum, which already existed in Munich. What kind of school is it?
• How did the idea of Online Master School come about? Is it a virtual continuation of your school in Moscow?
• What does this teaching work mean for you? And for the children and their parents?
• Your experience as a teacher and the practical application of a new approach to teaching children – is that relevant to today’s Russia? What do you think about the system of education now in Russia?
• How do you see the future? Yours and the future of your children?
• These days some people are returning to Russia – the reasons are different: residence permits are not renewed or not granted, there are no jobs or sources of income. What do you think about this?
• What is your attitude to people who have not left Russia?
• Would you return to Russia? What would have to happen for this to become realistic for you? And the children? Is this new generation already lost to Russia?

Welcome to the twenty-seventh edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. My guest today is Mikhail Shishkin, a Russian writer who has resided outside Russia for almost 30 years. Last September, Mikhail Shishkin announced a new literary prize  –  “ Dar” [“The Gift”]. The press release about the new prize states:

“The Russian Federation’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine, in addition to its primary goal – the destruction of a neighbouring state – is directed against the humanitarian values of world culture that unite us, and. of which the culture of the Russian language is part.. […]  “Dar” Prize […] is for all those who write and read in Russian, regardless of passport and country of residence. The Russian language belongs not to dictators, but to world culture”.

The principle prize is in the form of a grant to cover translation costs for the winning work into English, German and French. Mikhail Shishkin’s own books have been translated into 30 languages, and he himself is the winner of a number of major Russian-language literary awards, including the Big Book Prize, the Russian Booker Prize and the National Bestseller. Shishkin’s most recent book is “My Russia: War or Peace?”.  In this work Shishkin makes clear his attitude towards the Putin regime and its criminal war against Ukraine. As someone who writes in Russian and of Russian origin, Shishkin has never lost the burden of responsibility he feels for his country of birth. But today, his feelings of despair or alienation with regard to Russia have turned into action.  In this episode, we talk about the point of the “Dar” Prize and why the prize is so important today. This podcast was recorded on 13 January 2025.

Welcome to the twenty-sixth edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. In this episode, you can hear the second part of my interview with Irina Shcherbakova, one of the founders of “Memorial”. I first spoke to her in October of this year [you can listen to podcast #24 on our website here, where you can also find links to our YouTube channel and other platforms]. Since we last spoke, there has been another blow to the impartial study of Russian history. On 14 November, the Moscow Museum of the History of the Gulag was shut. The official reason given was that it was a fire risk. This would seem to be the most recent link in the chain that has seen the shutting down of unauthorised interpretations of Russian history. Before that, the Perm-36 museum was declared a foreign agent and then seized by the local authorities; “Memorial” was declared a foreign agent and then closed in 2021; and, in parallel, the authorities took control of all public initiatives, such as the Immortal Regiment, honouring the memory of war victims. The main theme of our conversation today is: what role does insistence on the ‘correct’ interpretation of history play in the political and social life of Russia – and why is controlling the historical narrative so important for the Putin regime? This podcast was recorded on 18 December 2024.

Welcome to the twenty-fifth edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. My guest today is human rights activist and founder of the European LGBT human rights organization Equal – PostOST, Evelina Chaika. A year ago, the non-existent “international LGBT movement” was designated an extremist organization and banned in Russia. This was the culmination of long-drawn-out struggle against anything not considered ‘traditional family life’ in Putin’s Russia. The history of homosexuality in Russia – as in other countries – is not straightforward. But while in other countries it was decriminalized long ago, in post-Soviet Russia this happened only in 1993 by decree of the first president of Russia, Boris Yeltsin. This was a preamble to joining the Council of Europe, an organisation for which the right to choose one’s sexuality is an integral part of human rights. However, it took a few more years for homosexuality to be removed from the list of illnesses in Russia. This only happened on 1 January 1999. At that point in time, homosexuals received the right to serve in the army. But today, in Putin’s Russia, the situation for the LGBT community is becoming more serious and dangerous. With the passage of the law banning transgender transition on 14 July 2023, trans and non-binary people have lost a legal avenue for recognition of their identity. The law has also jeopardized the safety of trans people who have already transitioned. Over the past ten years, Russian authorities have consistently restricted the rights of the LGBT community and shaped negative public attitudes through official statements and the media. The most important signal of a change of course was the adoption of a law on the banning of LGBT propaganda in relation to children in 2013. According to the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center, 90% of Russians were in favour of this law. After its adoption, many members of the LGBT community decided to leave Russia, and the number of those who have left continues to grow.

This podcast was recorded on 28 November 2024.

Questions:

• Evelina, tell us a little bit about yourself. What kind of family were you born into, and what do you remember about your own journey to the realization that you have a different orientation?
• You have been living in Germany for many years now. Was there a moment when you realized you could no longer live in Russia?
• Why did you decide to found Equal-PostOST? Please explain its goals. Who do you help and with what? How much demand is there for Equal-PostOST’s services?
• In your opinion, why is the LGBT community so persecuted in Putin’s Russia? What role does this struggle play in the ideology of Putinism?
• What have been the key stages in the persecution of the LGBT community under Putin?
• Gays in Chechnya have long been subjected to severe discrimination and persecution by the local authorities. What is the situation there now? And what can LGBT people do in Chechnya to protect themselves?
• Do you have any information about how LGBT people live in Russia now? Could you give us a few examples of things that can happen to members of the community?
• Is there any data on how many LGBT people have decided to leave Russia since 2013? Do any stories of individuals come to mind?
• Can you explain why Russia’s anti-LGBT laws are in violation of human rights?
• Do you believe that 90 percent of Russians supported the law banning LGBT propaganda to children in 2013? Why are most Russian people so intolerant of different orientations?
• What is the main factor in today’s Russia determining attitudes towards gay people – is it public opinion or state repression?
• Is there hope for change for the better?

Welcome to the twenty-fourth edition n of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. There is a well-known saying from the late Soviet period: “Russia is a country with an unpredictable past”. It resonates anew, this time in Putin’s Russia. My guest today is Irina Shcherbakova, a historian, who has been associated with the Russian grass-roots organisation “Memorial” since its foundation in 1988. After graduating from the Faculty of Philology at Moscow State University in the 1970s, she worked in the field of oral history, collecting the testimonies of victims of Stalinism. Through her work, Irina Shcherbakova has gained a deep understanding of how first the Soviet and later the Federation of Russia’s regimes’ interpretation of Russian history has changed over the years.  From glasnost in the Gorbachev era, when Memorial was founded, to the present day, the past in Russia has indeed been “unpredictable”.  It is about this and other more personal matters that I hope to talk to our guest today. 

This podcast was recorded on 10 October 2024.

My questions:

• Tell us a little about yourself.  Who were your parents? What moral guidelines or role models did you take with you from your childhood?
• Back in the 1970s, you began collecting the testimonies of victims of Stalinism.  How did you find people who were willing to talk back then? What was the most important thing for you personally that you learned in the course of your research? How easy was it to do this work in Soviet times before glasnost and when the memory of the Stalinist era was still very fresh?
• How did it happen that you became one of the founders of “Memorial”? What were the goals that you and your co-founders hoped to achieve in setting up the organisation?
• At what point, in addition to researching Stalinist repressions, did “Memorial” become actively engaged in contemporary events? Was this during the Yeltsin era? 
• What is your attitude to lustration? Should it have been carried out in the early 1990s in your opinion?
• On the theme of what more could have been done after the collapse of the Soviet Union, people often talk about the need to give a ‘legal assessment’ of historical events or to hold a tribunal to judge Stalin’s crimes. What do you think about this, and is such a process possible in the future?

Welcome to the twenty-third edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. My guest today is the Russian artist Slava Ptrk.

The Crypt Gallery in central London recently hosted a multimedia exhibition called The Brainwashing Machine, about the uses of propaganda.  The exhibition, which first opened in Madrid, showed works by artists from a range of different countries, but the great majority was from Russia. The venue in the basement of the Crypt at St. Pancras Church provided a dark and atmospheric labyrinth, with dark cells where little light penetrated.  In these alcoves and on their rough walls, were displayed intriguing interpretations of the role of propaganda in contemporary life. Among them, were works by Sasha Skochilenko, made while she was still in prison in Russia, Pavel Otdelnov and Nadia Tolokonnikova. One could also read and hear the words of dramatist Zhenya Berkovich and director Svetlana Petriichuk, both still in a Russian prison today. But personally, I was most taken by the works of our guest today: Slava Ptrk

This podcast was recorded on 19 September 2024.

My questions include:

• Tell us about your name, if you would. It’s a pseudonym, but why did you choose to glorify PTRK?
• Tell us about how you came to be a part of The Brainwashing Machine exhibition about propaganda?
• Your works exhibited in the exhibition – did you make them especially for the exhibition ?
• Perhaps your most memorable work in the exhibition is called ‘I am not interested in politics.’ Tell us about it and how it came about.
• You started your professional career as a journalist. Is that why propaganda and its impact are important subjects for you? What were your experiences as a journalist in this regard?
• What served as the impetus for you to become an artist? What were your first steps in this direction.
• What is most for you in expressing yourselMy questions include:
• Tell us about your name, if you would. It’s a pseudonym, I guess,  but why did you choose to glorify PTRK?
• Tell us about how you came to be a part of The Brainwashing Machine exhibition?
• Your works for the exhibition – did you make them especially?
• Perhaps your most memorable work in the exhibition is called ‘I am not interested in politics.’ Tell us about it and how it came about.
• You started your professional career as a journalist. Is that why propaganda and its impact are important subjects for you? What were your experiences as a journalist in this regard?
• What served as the impetus for you to become an artist? What were your first steps as an artist?
• What is most important to you in giving expression to yourself and the surrounding reality in your art? You have said that your chief instrument is irony.
• Another work in The Brainwashing Machine exhibition in London is called ‘Steps’ and next to it is a work titled ‘Ways.’ What do these works represent? How do they relate to propaganda? 
• Looking at your street art, one could guess that Banksy was a strong influence on your work. Is that so,  or did you take inspiration elsewhere?
• Your final work in the London exhibition is called ‘The Sinnerman.’ It is uses a mobile phone screen. How should one understand this work and what, or who, is depicted in it?
• When and why did you decide to leave Russia?
• How does being outside Russia affect your choice of subjects for your current and future work?
• Do you have hopes of returning to Russia?

Welcome to the twentieth edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. My guest today is Olga Sadovskaya, a lawyer from the civil society group, Team Against Torture. The project’s members have been investigating complaints by Russians about torture for over two decades. Thanks to their work, hundreds of cases of torture by law enforcement officers have reached the courts and compensation from the state has been awarded to their victims. Olga Sadovskaya lives and works in her native city of Nizhny Novgorod. She graduated from Lobachevsky State University with a degree in Public International Law, defending the first thesis in Russia on the prohibition of torture and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on this issue. She has been taking cases to the European Court of Human Rights for over 20 years. This podcast was recorded on 20 June 2024.

My questions include:

1. You chose a rather unusual topic for your diploma. In 2003, when you defended it, what profession did you think you would pursue in the future?
2. How did it come about that you specialised in torture?
3. In Russia, it seems to me, few people are concerned about torture – people think ‘that’s just how it should be’, or ‘they deserve it, and that’s all there is to it.’ How do you explain the rather high tolerance for violence in Russia?
4. Since the beginning of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, has the Russian public’s attitude to torture changed? Has it become better, worse, or have moral and ethical guidelines shifted in general?
5. Previously, in such situations it was common to appeal to the ECtHR, but in 2022 the Russian Federation withdrew from the jurisdiction of the European Court. What tools are now left for Russian human rights defenders to seek justice?
6. I read somewhere that you have said that “all wars end in a resolution of peace.” In your opinion, will Russia’s war against Ukraine also end through peace negotiations? With the intervention of international forums, or do the warring parties no longer have confidence in them?  
7. What is it like for you and other human rights defenders to work under current conditions?
8. Since the spring of 2022, when the register of foreign agents is updated every Friday, have many of your colleagues left the country or given up their human rights practice?
9. How does the ‘foreign agent’ label affect your professional work. And can you explain what is an “undesirable organisation”?
10. Have you ever received any threats yourself? Or have there been administrative cases initiated against you?
11. What is meant by the word “torture” and what should a person do if they find themselves in a situation where, in their opinion, they are being subjected to torture? And what if they are exposed  to torture in detention? What should they do then?
12. Is there such a thing as psychological torture? Have you experienced it yourself in your work as a human rights defender?
13. Can such a term be applied to what happened to your fellow resident of Nizhny Novgorod, Irina Slavina, who committed suicide in the most horrible way in front of the Interior Ministry building in the city centre in 2020?
14. You said somewhere that ‘even if a person is not themselves directly involved in torture, they could still be party to the system of violence.’ Can you elaborate? 
15. What does the police treatment of suspects in the terrorist attack on Crocus City Hall in March this year tell us about today’s Russia?
16. In Russia now everyone is living with uncertainty. What options for the future of your work do you see?
17. Can you imagine ever being forced to give up your work – that the screws will be tightened to such an extent that it will be impossible to work in the field of human rights in Russia?

Our guest today is Zoia Svetova, renowned journalist and human rights activist. She continues to live and work in Moscow.  She is the author of several books, including Priznat’ nevinovnogo vinovnym [To Find the Innocent Guilty]. Her voice is perhaps one of the few authoritative oppositionist voices still heard in Russia today.  

This podcast was recorded on 26 March 2024.

My questions include:

• When it became known that Russian troops had invaded Ukraine in 2022, could you ever have imagined such a thing happening?
• You decided to stay in Russia. Did you discuss with your family, your four adult children, whether to leave or stay in Russia?
• Can I ask you to tell us a little about your family? After all, you are part of Russia’s hereditary dissident aristocracy, if I may put it like that. Tell us about your parents, what you most remember about them, about their lives? 
• Your husband was also involved in the dissident movement.  How did you meet? And how did you bring up your children, what were the main moral values you tried to pass on to them?
• When Putin became president in 2000, did you have any hopes?
• Was there a key episode when it became clear for you which direction his regime was heading?
• The title of this podcast, “Then and Now,” is associated with the fateful date of 24 February 2022. But there has since been another terrible date that will be a significant event in the perception of the world and of Russian public opinion  – 16 February this year. What was your first reaction when you learned of Aleksei Navalny’s death in the Polar Wolf penal colony.
• What did Navalny mean for Russia, what did he symbolise? And what did his death in prison mean for the future of Russia?
• You were at Aleksei’s funeral in Moscow. Could you share the mood that prevailed there, what you observed –  tell us about your impressions.
• Should other political prisoners in Russia now fear for their lives?
• Just recently, a presidential election was conducted in Russia. If I’m not mistaken, you were abroad at that time. Did you take part in the “Noon against Putin” protest? Did the protests bring any benefits? And is there any difference between such protests in Russia and abroad?
• Your sons Tikhon and Filip are engaged in interesting work abroad. Does the fact that Tikhon is on the register of foreign agents and is editor-in-chief of the Dozhd TV company, which has been declared an undesirable organization in Russia, affect your life in Moscow in any way?
• After the attack on Leonid Volkov, a leading member of Navalny’s team, in Vilnius, do you fear for your own children and other Russian oppositionists living outside Russia? 
• What would have to happen in Russia for you to change your mind and leave the country?
• What needs to happen in Russia for your children and grandchildren to return home? 
• What are your thoughts about the recent terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall in Moscow?  Do you think 22 March 2024 will be another milestone in the history of the Putin regime?

My guest today is Anastasia Burakova, a human rights lawyer and democratic activist from Russia. 

We are still in shock at the news of the murder of Aleksei Navalny in a high-security penal colony in the settlement of Kharp. 

Aleksei Navalny’s political star rose as a leader of the opposition to the Putin regime in 2011.  That year, 2011, played a significant part in the  political coming of age of  today’s guest - Anastasia Burakova, a Russian human rights lawyer and activist for democratic change in Russia - and influenced the trajectory of her professional life.

However, ten years later, in November 2021, Anastasia was forced to leave Russia. She moved to Georgia after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, where she founded the Ark Project (‘Kovcheg’). Initially, set up to offer help to exiled Russians because of their opposition to the war, over time, Ark’s activities have broadened.

This podcast was recorded on 22 February 2024.

My questions include:

1. I am haunted by two thoughts that never leave me now – the death in prison of Aleksei Navalny and the second year of war inUkraine. What thoughts have occupied you most this past week?
2. In an interview almost one year ago, you talked about a ‘white rose’ of resistance in Russia. Are there grounds for optimism in Russia today?
3. The journalist Elena Kostyuchenko wrote in her book about Russia: “Why did I ever think my life would be different?” Do you have an answer for her?
4. Tell us a little about your childhood. Were there any key moments in your biography that led you to your choice of profession and the path you followed?
5. You have said that the year 2011 played a big role in your own development. What does 2011 in Russia mean to you? What are your most vivid impressions of that year?
6. You left Russia at the end of 2021, just 10 years later. What happened in the intervening years in the field of civic activism?
7. To what extent did human rights and civic activism face new and more difficult challenges in the period leading up to the invasion of Ukraine? What defined the relationship of the authorities to civil society?
8. Soon after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, you founded the Ark Project. What was the idea behind the project and who are the beneficiaries?
9. Is there any real hope for the Russian opposition in exile? What can it really do? 
10. What do the countries that have welcomed Russian exiles have to gain from their presence? 
11. Aleksei Navalny from prison urged the Russian people to act. He proposed that people should go to the polling stations on the last day of the election, 17 March, at 12.00 noon local time, and stand in line outside the polling station in protest. Do you think there’s a chance that many will do this following his assassination in prison by the Russian authorities?
12. What do you think the future holds for you? And what are your thoughts about the future of Russia?

Welcome to the fifteenth edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. 

My guest today is Anna Karetnikova. Until recently, Anna Karetnikova lived and worked in Moscow.  In 2016, she was appointed lead analyst to the Federal Penitentiary Service – FSIN. Prior to that, she served for eight years as a member of the Public Oversight Commission (POC) in Moscow and worked closely with the human rights organisation “Memorial”.

Anna Karetnikova exemplified that rare combination in Russia of someone who was both a human rights activist and a government-appointed official working for the FSIN. For several years she pulled this off brilliantly. But just over a year ago, she was forced to leave Russia. The events that led to this decision and how she feels about life in exile are among the topics we will be talking about.

This podcast was recorded on 8 February 2024.

ou can also listen to the podcast on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts and YouTube. 

My questions include:

1. Before your appointment to the Federal Penitentiary Service, you worked in the Public Oversight Commission in Moscow. What were the functions of this commission and how did your work there lead to your appointment to the Federal Penitentiary Service?
2. Did you have any interests or occupations from a young age which helped you decide to take up this kind of work?
3. How did it happen that you were invited to join the FSIN? What did  your work there involve?  Is it true there is no such position as lead analyst in any other regional branch of the FSIN?
4. How does the system of corresponding with political prisoners work? Do they really receive letters of support from people they don’t know? Do the authorities still allow this?
5. Unlike many of your colleagues, acquaintances and friends in human rights organizations, you stayed in Russia after the Special Military Operation was launched on February 24th 2022? Was leaving Russia not an issue for you at that time?
6. What changed in the FSIN system that prompted you to decide to leave Russia almost a year later?
7. What was your reaction when you learned about the recruitment of lifers in the penal system to the Wagner private military company? What did it say about the attitude of the authorities both to the war and to society as a whole?
8. What changes did you observe in the FSIN and in the regime to prisons and penal colonies after the start of the war?
9. And in the treatment of prisoners? Were there problems, for example, with supplies? Or other issues? xould they still correspond with relatives and have visits from them?
10. Would you say the numbers of political prisoners has increased since the start of the war?
11. With your experience and knowledge of the penal system in Russia, what can you comment about the treatment of Aleksei Navalny in the penal colony? To what extent does his treatment differ from the treatment of other prisoners? And how?
12. And Vladimir Kara-Murza? Could you comment on his recent transfer to the correctional colony No. 7 Omsk. 
13. You currently live in France. Why France?
14. How do you see your future?  And the future of Russia?

My guests today are Mamuka Kuparadze, the founder of Studio Re in Tbilisi, which works to advance ‘people’s diplomacy’ through documentary film, and Aleksandr Pichugin, a Russian journalist, originally from Nizhny Novgorod, who left Russia with his family immediately after the announcement of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and started a new life in Tbilisi.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the flow of Russian citizens fleeing the war to Georgia has reached an unprecedented 100,000. That’s the size of two small Georgian cities such as Gori, for example.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, relations between Georgia and Russia have not been easy. There have been wars of secession, first in South Ossetia, then in Abkhazia, and their de facto removal from Georgian government control. And the culmination of these wars, we can say, took place 15 years later, in 2008, when Russia invaded Georgia and won a five-day war after which Russia “officially” recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia (both are still considered by the international community as legitimate parts of Georgia. Georgia itself calls them Russian-occupied territories).

In this edition of ‘Then and Now’, we take a look at how Georgian society and government perceives these immigrants from Russia and how Russian immigrants live there.

The recording was made on 4 January 2024.

My questions include:

• Aleksandr, what pushed you to such an important decision for yourself and your family? After all, it is not easy to start from scratch in a foreign country?
• Why Georgia? Did the visa system play a role in your decision?
• Did you find a place to live? A job? Tell us a little about how you solved such domestic problems and how you were received by Georgian society. Is there a sense of a separate ‘Russian world’ in Tbilisi?
• Mamuka, Studio Re recently released a short movie about how the local population feels about the flow of Russian immigrants into their country. What were the main findings of your research?
• How does the flow of Russians into Georgia affect the country’s economy?
• Against the background of extremely uneasy and tense relations with Putin’s Russia, how do the Georgian government and civil society feel about the presence of so many Russians on Georgian territory, Mamuka?
• Refugees from Ukraine have also come to Georgia. Aleksandr, is the presence of Ukrainians felt in your circles?
• The Georgian border service has denied entry to the country to several Russian citizens who are critical of Putin’s regime, such as Mikhail Fishman, journalist, presenter and analyst of TV Dozhd, and others. What is the explanation for this, Mamuka? What is the position of the country’s ruling party, the ‘Georgian Dream’, towards today’s Russia?
• How does it differ from the position of activists in civil society?
• Aleksandr, how did you in Georgia perceive the new flow of Russian immigrants, which began immediately after the announcement of mobilization on 22 October? Do you feel a difference in the motivation and goals of the first wave compared to the second?
• Has the war with Ukraine given rise to new anxieties on the part of Russia in Georgia, Mamuka?
• How do Russians in Georgia see their future? Have some already returned to Russia? How do you personally see your future, Aleksandr?

Welcome to the thirteenth edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. 

My guest today is Lev Aleksandrovich Ponomarev. Lev Ponomarev trained and worked as a physicist in the USSR before devoting more time and energy to issues of human rights in the Soviet Union and subsequently in the Russian Federation. He was one of the founders of  « Memorial » in 1988, and soon became one of the foremost figures  in human rights in Russia. In the dying days of perestroika, Lev Ponomarev went into politics and in 1990 co-founded the opposition movement « Democratic Russia ». He was a People’s Deputy at the end of the Soviet era and a deputy of the first convocation of the State Duma in the new Russia after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. In 1997 he founded the not-for-profit « For Human Rights » and in 2007 he set up the « Foundation in Defence of Prisoners’ Rights ». He was a member of the Moscow Helsinki Group from 1996 until its closure last year. In 2019 his organisation « For Human Rights » was shut down by the authorities. On December 28, 2020, Lev Ponomarev’s name was in the first list of individuals designated as ‘media foreign agents’ by the Russian Justice Ministry.

The recording was made on 22 December 2023.

You can also listen to the podcast on our website, or on SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

My questions include:

• Lev Aleksandrovich, where were you when you learned that Russia had launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine? Do you remember how you felt at that moment?
• If I’m not mistaken, you now live in Paris. Could you tell me how this came about?
• Your NGO « For Human Rights » was closed down in 2019 and a year later you yourself became a “Media – Foreign Agent”. How did you feel when all this was happening and why did the authorities do this?
• You have always been someone who warned about the dangerous developments of the Putin regime. Do you think you had insights that others did not? Does everyone agree with you now?
• What do you think was Boris Yeltsin’s biggest mistake?
• Presidential elections are scheduled for next March – although we already know that they will not be “free and fair”. What do you think civil society should do in the run-up to the election – and during the election itself?
• To what extent do people in emigration perceive things differently from those who stayed in Russia? Is this difference noticeable to you? How do you think it affects relations between those who have left Russia and those who remained?
• It is hard not to be pessimistic about human rights in the near future, not least because Russia’s war against Ukraine is still ongoing.  But in the longer term, are there grounds for optimism?

My guest today is Natalya Zyagina, head of the Moscow branch of Amnesty International shut down by the Russian authorities in 2022. Natalya Zvyagina has a long record as a Russian human rights activist. She is originally from the city of Voronezh, where she worked for many years in the Interregional Human Rights Group. Natalya has also worked at the Institute for Law and Public Policy, a non-profit organization based in Moscow, and at the Russian branch of Transparency International.

This recording was made on 30 November 2023.

In addition to our website, you can also listen to the podcast on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

My questions include:

• First of all, please tell us about your work in Voronezh. What prompted you to become involved in human rights work?
• In the 1990s Voronezh became one of the main centres of human rights activity in Russia, and many of Russia’s leading human rights defenders come from there. What do you attribute this to?
• In 2018, you took up the post of head of Amnesty International’s Moscow office. What were your expectations at that time? What was Amnesty’s role in Russia at that time? How did the Russian human rights community feel about the organisation?
• Looking back, how do you assess the change in the status of Aleksei Navalny, whose recognition as a prisoner of conscience was removed for a while, although now he is again recognised as such? And how important is Amnesty’s classification of people as “prisoners of conscience” for the Russian public and human rights community in general?
• In March 2022, the Russian media regulator blocked access to Amnesty International’s Russian-language website. What impact did this decision have on your work?
• In April of the same year Russian authorities removed the Amnesty’s registration as a representative office in Moscow. In addition to Amnesty’s office, the Russian Ministry of Justice closed the offices of 15 representative offices of foreign NGOs and foundations, including Human Rights Watch, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Heinrich Böll, Friedrich Naumann, Friedrich Ebert, and other organizations. The Justice Ministry said at the time that this was done “in connection with revealed violations of Russian law.” What was all this in fact about?
• At the time, Agnès Callamard, secretary general of Amnesty International, said that Amnesty would continue its work to document and expose human rights abuses in Russia despite the office closure. How easy was it for Amnesty to continue its work without a Moscow office? What has been your personal situation and that of other staff members since then?
• Where were you when Russia invaded Ukraine? Did the invasion of Ukraine come as a shock to you?
• Are the current extreme measures against human rights in Russia a result of the war? Or have the policies of the Putin regime been moving in this repressive direction anyway?
• After all these events, a new conflict has erupted in the Middle East. Has this had any impact on your work at Amnesty?
• How do you assess the events in Dagestan in relation to the war in the Middle East?
• Many human rights defenders have left Russia. What is life like for those who have remained in the country? Can they do any meaningful work at all?
• Recently, the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs drafted a bill that would require foreigners visiting Russia to declare their “loyalty” to the Russian authorities. What does this mean?
• How do you see the future of human rights work in Russia?

My guests today are two Parisians, Aleksandra Ilkhovskaya and Svetlana Dokudovskaya: Aleksandra [known to everyone as “Sanya]” has lived in Paris since she was six years old – her mother emigrated from Russia in 1991. She is married with two daughters. She is a primary school teacher with 10 years’ experience. Svetlana has lived with her French husband and their 13-year-old daughter in Paris for the past 17 years. She works as a cell biologist at the Gustave Roussy Institute, Europe’s largest cancer research centre. Both their lives changed after February 24th 2022.

This recording was made on 22 September 2023.

My questions include:

1. What were your thoughts and feelings when you woke up last February 24th?
2. Why did you decide you needed to take action? And how?
3. When did you first arrive at the train station and what did you find there?
4. You obviously helped the people there a great deal, but what did you get out of the experience, what did you learn or discover about yourselves?
5. Sveta, with Sanya’s help, you published a book called “Operation Montparnasse”. It contains the stories of refugees and also the stories of your fellow Russian volunteers/translators. What would you say is the particular importance of the book for you?  And for your readers?

My guest today is the author Maxim Osipov.  Following in the great Russian tradition of Chekhov and Bulgakov, he has pursued a career in medicine in parallel with that of a writer.  For his works of fiction – for the most part short stories that are sharp and witty commentaries on modern-day life in the Russian provinces – Maxim Osipov has won a number of literary prizes, and his plays have been staged as well as broadcast on the radio in Russia. Osipov’s works have been translated into 18 languages. His books published in English include the collections of short stories Rock, Paper, Scissors and Other Stories and Kilometer 101 (see my review in Rights in Russia from earlier this year).

Shortly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Maxim Osipov signed several letters condemning Putin’s military operation.. He left Russia on 4 March 2023 and now lives in the Netherlands where he has launched a new quarterly literary journal,  The Fifth Wave. 

This recording was made on 11 August 2023.

My questions:

• You left Russia almost immediately after the Russian army invaded Ukraine. How did you come to take such a decision? How difficult was it for you?
• Before you left Russia you successfully combined the professions of cardiologist in Tarusa with that of a writer of short stories and other works of literature. How did these two roles complement one another?
• Do the current policies of Putin’s Russia allow you to be a writer? What is the duty or role of a Russian writer in today’s situation?
• What’s your reaction when accusations of imperialism and ‘colonial thinking’ are made against some of the classics of Russian literature? To what extent are they justified? Do you see attempts outside Russia to cancel Russian culture, as is claimed by Russian propaganda?
• In justifying the invasion of Ukraine, Putin set out his interpretation of history, claiming that Ukraine belongs to the ‘Russian world.’ To what extent does such use of history as justification have a place in the contemporary world?
• You have recently begun publication of a new journal. Tell us about it and your aims and aspirations for it.
• You have named your magazine The Fifth Wave. You wrote earlier that this wave of emigration is most similar to the first wave after 1917. What did you have in mind?
• Do you continue to write fiction in emigration? You no longer practice as a doctor, so where do you get your material from?
• How do you find life in emigration?
• Are there circumstances under which you would return to Russia?

Welcome to the ninth edition of our Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. 

My guest today is Tetyana Sokolova, a professional midwife of 40 years at Mariupol Maternity Hospital No. 2, on the left bank of Mariupol near Azovstal, the industrial plant that became a centre of resistance against the Russian invaders. 

On 9 March, the city’s Maternity Hospital No. 3 was bombed by Russian aircraft and the whole world watched with horror pictures of the destroyed building and Ukrainian soldiers’ desperate attempts to save the life of a pregnant woman, as she lay on a stretcher among the ruins.

Three pregnant women from the rubble of Maternity Hospital No. 3 were brought to Tetyana and her team of midwives, 

For her work, her resilience and her bravery under the most difficult of conditions, Tetyana was awarded the international Anna Politkovskaya prize, named in honour of the murdered journalist.

My questions

1.  Where were you when you realised that Russia had invaded Ukraine? What was your reaction and what were your first thoughts?

2.  You went to work on 2 March.  Did you waver at all in your decision?  After all, it was less than a week since the war had started.  What made you to go to work that day?

3.  Tell us about the events of 9 March and how they impacted you personally.

4.  You have worked in Mariupol all your professional life - what made you become a midwife?

5. Could you ever have imagined that you would be an eyewitness to alleged war crimes?

6. How did you escape from Mariupol?

7. Where do you live now?

8. Do you cherish hopes of returning to Mariupol one day? 

10.  Were you surprised to be awarded the Anna Politkovskaya prize? Did you know about her before?

Welcome to the seventh episode of our new Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas. In recent weeks, politically motivated trials and lengthy prison terms in Putin’s Russia reached a new peak. Vladimir Kara-Murza was sentenced to 25 years’ imprisonment for treason and Evgenia Berkovich and Svetlana Petriichuk have been remanded in custody awaiting trial for “justifying terrorism” in connection with the staging of a play. Some say these developments signify a return to the USSR of the 1970s, others that it is reminiscent of Stalinist purges. Our guest today, Boris Kuznetsov, is a lawyer who played a key role in the first high profile trial of Putin’s presidency – he defended the interests of relatives of the sailors who died on the Kursk nuclear submarine, which sank in 2000. We invited him to share with us his experiences of the Kursk case in particular, and more widely his observations and reflections on the legal system and practice of jurisprudence in Putin’s Russia. The recording was made on 1 June 2023.

Our latest guest is the Ukrainian writer Andrei Kurkov. Andrei Kurkov became widely known to readers around the world in 2001 when his novel Smert’ postoronnego [Смерть Постороннего] was published in English translation as Death and the Penguin. Other novels followed and, in their wake, worldwide recognition and success at prominent international literary awards. His latest novel, Grey Bees, tells the story of an elderly beekeeper in the occupied territory of Donbas. The novel touches on the war in Donbas and on the violation of Crimean Tatar rights in Russian annexed Crimea. In 2015 his Ukraine Diaries was published in English and, recently, his Diary of an Invasion.  

This recording took place on 14 April 2023. 

Diary of an Invasion is published by Mountain Leopard  Press, ISBN: 9781914495847, pp 304, London, 2022. It is a collection of Andrei Kurkov’s writings and broadcasts from Ukraine in the lead up to and during the war.

You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

My questions include:

1.      You started your Diary of an Invasion just before New Year at the very end of 2021. Do you always keep a diary?

2.      What emotions did you feel when you learnt what had happened on February 24th?

3.      How do you see the role of the writer during the war?

4.      Before the invasion, your remarks in the Diary about Ukraine and your Ukrainian compatriots are quite multifaceted. But after you tend to write about them as if they were figures from Ukrainian historical myths (‘bylinas’) – how brave, freedom-loving they are, and how different they are from the Russians. It is as if those human traits that make your novels so memorable and touching aren’t relevant here. What explains that change?

5.      You write about the traditions of the Ukrainian people and the creation of myths in times of crisis. What is the role of traditions and myths in the identity of a people?

6.      Your native language, in which you became a famous writer, is Russian. Have you ever had any problems in your relations with Ukrainian writers or the public because of it?

7.      What is your attitude to the Russian language in Ukraine now?

8.      How do Russians around the world react to your advocacy for Ukraine – do you get hate mail from Russians?

9.      Do you see the possibility for Russian-speaking Ukrainians to write in Russian again in the future?

10.  You write in your Diary that you have an unfinished novel… will you be able to finish it or is it doomed to remain in the unfinished after the Russian invasion?

11.  Do you believe in the concept of ‘good Russians’? Who is a ‘good Russian’ for you?

12.  Has Russian culture played a major role in your own development as a writer?

13.  Are there any commonalities between Russian and Ukrainian culture and traditions? (You write in the Diary about the feat of Russian PR in promoting Russian culture around the world, as if Russian culture would not be so highly regarded without it.)

14.  How do you see the future of Ukraine? And of Russia? 

Welcome to the third episode of our new Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas.  

After the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022 everything, everywhere, suddenly looked different. That day was a watershed. Guests on the Then & Now podcast are people for whom February 24 became a defining moment, dividing their lives into before and after the war.

Today’s guest is Lev Gudkov, a sociologist and director of the analytical Levada Centre, Russia’s leading independent polling organisation. He is also editor-in-chief of the journal The Russian Public Opinion Herald. Lev Dmitrievich has worked at the Levada Centre since its founding, initiated by Yury Levada in 2003. After the death of Yury Levada in 2006, Lev Dmitrievich becamse the director of the Centre. In September 2016 the Levada Centre was designated as a ‘foreign agent’ organisation, a move which at the time Lev Gudkov said amounted to ‘political censorship.’

This recording took place on 16 March 2023

Welcome to the second episode of our new Russian-language podcast Then & Now with me, Teresa Cherfas.  

After the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022 everything, everywhere, suddenly looked different. That day was a watershed. Guests on the Then & Now podcast are people for whom February 24 became a defining moment, dividing their lives into before and after the war.

Today’s guest is Svetlana Alekseevna Gannushkina: human rights activist, social activist and chair of the Committee for Civic Assistance – the first human rights organisation in Russia helping refugees and displaced persons. In 1991, she was one of the founding members of the Memorial Centre for Human Rights and in 2010  – together with Memorial – she was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. On December 23, 2022, her name was added to the register of ‘foreign agents.’  Her organisation, the Committee for Civic Assistance, was registered as a 'foreign agent' in April 2015.  

The recording took place on 16 February 2023

My questions include:

• What did you recall of your feelings and thoughts on 24 February 2022?
• What were the key events that led you to become a human rights activist?
• Why did you decide to focus your work on refugees? 
• How does being on the register of 'foreign agents' affect you? And the work of your organisation?
• You often talk about feelings of shame and responsibility for your country. How do you understand Russia’s lack of sympathy for Ukrainians?
• What is left of civil society in Russia today after the closures of Memorial, the Moscow Helsinki Group and the Sakharov Centre?
• How do you see the future of Russia?

Our guest on the podcast this week is Varvara Pakhomenko. Varvara Pakhomenko has been a human rights activist for a very long time. Back in her native Tomsk she was actively involved in human rights activities. Having moved to Moscow, Varvara began working with many human rights activists in the capital, but the geography of her travels remained very wide. Since 2006, Varvara Pakhomenko has worked in conflict zones in the North and South Caucasus: in 2006-2009 at the human rights organization Demos, in 2009-2011 at the Dutch organization Russian Justice Initiative, and since 2011 she has worked as a programme analyst for Europe and Central Asia at the International Crisis Group. When the Russian authorities effectively closed the ICG’s Moscow office, Varvara left to work in Ukraine. There she worked first for the UN Development Programme and after that for Geneva Call. A move to Canada seemed to put some distance between her and Europe, but now Varvara Pakhomenko is back again on the old continent.

The recording took place on 24 June 2022.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

You can also listen to the podcast in full here (see also below):

The questions we ask Varvara Pakhomenko include:

·         How did human rights activism come into your life?

·         One of Tomsk’s leading human rights activists was Boris Maksovich Kreindel. He was involved in many projects, including defending the rights of Roma in Tomsk region. How did it happen that he had to leave his native land?

·         Tell us about your work in the conflict zones in the Caucasus – where did you work? To what extent was it dangerous?

·         Which Moscow human rights activists and which organizations have you worked with in Russia?

·         When and why did you decide to move to Ukraine?

·         How does the human rights movement in Ukraine differ from that in Russia?

·         At least since 2012 the Russian authorities have pursued policies of increasing restrictions on human rights work in the country, attacks on freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and a general moved towards isolationism. Do you think they have been preparing for the war against Ukraine for a long time?

·         What has been your role at the UNDP and Geneva Call?

·         How has the Ukrainian army changed since 2014. How do you assess the Ukrainian military’s compliance with international humanitarian law and with the rules and customs of warfare?

·         How do you see the future of human rights in Russia and the future of human rights organizations?

Our guest on the podcast this week is Nikolai Kavkazsky. Nikolai Yurievich Kavkazsy is a Russian civil society activist, human rights defender and opposition politician. He is one of the leading Yabloko activists in Moscow. Nikolai Kavkazsky was a defendant in the Bolotnoe case. Politically, he defines himself as a left-wing social democrat, an internationalist, a supporter of LGBT rights and of feminism. He is an advocate of juvenile justice and a humane drug policy.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

The recording was made on 18 June 2022.

The questions we ask Nikolai Kavkazsky include:

·         Which word best describes you – civil society activist, human rights activist or politician?

·         You studied law at the Institute of World Economy and Informatization. At what point did you realize you wanted to be a civil society activist and a politician?

·         You became a member of the Yabloko party in 2007 and are one of the party’s leading activists in Moscow. Why did you choose Yabloko as your party?

·         Why are political parties weak in Russia?

·         You took part in the Bolotnaya Square protest in 2012, after which you were charged with ‘participation in mass riots’ (under Article 212(2) of the Russian Criminal Code) and held on remand for almost a year and a half. Amnesty International recognized you as a prisoner of conscience, along with several other individuals involved in the Bolotnaya case. In December 2013, you were amnestied and the criminal case was dropped. How did all this happen?

·         What were the conditions in pre-trial detention centre?

·         You were an associate of the late Andrei Babushkin, who headed the Committee for Civil Rights. What is the work of this organization? And what kind of person was Andrei Babushkin?

·         You support LGBT rights in Russia. Why is the country so intolerant of LGBT people?

·         On 24 February 2022 you were detained for taking part in an anti-war protest. The next day you were jaled for six days. What is the situation regarding anti-war protests in Russia?

·         How do you see the future of the country and, in particular, the future of human rights?

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “Everything, absolutely everything, must be politicized. Including the question of installing benches at the entrance to an apartment building and protesting against plans to build in housing courtyards.” That’s what Simon Cosgrove and I were told by Nikolai Kavkazsky in a conversation we had with him last week. I’ve known Nikolai since the infamous Bolotnaya trial in Moscow. He is first and foremost a politician, a political activist. We also remember his active participation in human rights organizations, including Andrei Babushkin’s Committee for Civil Rights. It was an interesting conversation in which Nikolay Kavkazsky bravely states that he wants to change politics as they now are in Russia; he wants to change society so that it is more just, more free, and integrates all oppressed social groups.

Our guest on the podcast this week is the historian Nikita Vasilievich Petrov. Nikita Petrov is deputy chair of the board of the Memorial Research and Information Centre (which is based in St. Petersburg). Born in Kiev, Nikita Petrov graduated from the Moscow Institute of Chemical Engineering and went on to study at the Kurchatov Institute of Atomic Energy. His association with the Memorial Society began in 1988. As a historian Nikita Petrov has specialized in the history of the Soviet security services. He is known as the author and compiler of many works describing the structure and functions of the Soviet security services from 1917 to 1991.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

The recording took place on 30 May 2022.

·         When and why did you first become interested in history, particularly the history of Soviet repression and the security services?

·         When did your collaboration with Memorial begin?

·         You wrote a number of works with Arseny Roginsky, who headed Memorial and died in 2017. Can you tell us about how you first met, what it was like to work with Roginsky, and what he was like as a person?

·         As a historian who worked in Russia’s archives for many years, can you tell us how historians’ access to these archives has changed over the years?

·         You have written about the history of the NKVD under Stalin, in particular about Nikolai Yezhov. To what extent can we talk about the personal influence of people like Yagoda or Yezhov on the NKVD, or were they just doing Stalin’s bidding?

·         You also wrote about the role of the NKVD and MGB in Central and Eastern Europe from 1939. To what extent were the repressions against people of Polish nationality similar to the Nazi repressions on the basis of race – an example against people of Jewish origin?

·         Another topic you wrote about is that of Ivan Serov and the post-Stalinist KGB. To what extent did the security services change in the post-Stalin period, first as the KGB and then as the FSB?

·         Is there an explanation for why the security services played such an important role in Soviet and Russian history? For example: in the book From the Red Terror to the Mafia State: Russia’s Secret Services in the Struggle for World Domination the authors [historian Felshtinsky, who is not considered a historian by many, and former KGB Lieutenant Colonel Vladimir Popov (Canada)] write about the history of the state security takeover in Russia, presenting developments in terms of a confrontation between the Cheka-KGB and the Communist Party. In fact, did the Chekists confront the Communists or were they basically all the same kind of people?

·         Why are today’s authorities in Russia so interested in the study of history?

·         Are there any lessons in history? Including for the citizens of Russia?

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: Read old newspapers and magazines! That was exactly the advice Nikita Petrov got from his father. He taught him that reading the Soviet press would be interesting later, after many years had passed. So Nikita Petrov, who had studied to be a chemist, became a historian. In our latest podcast Nikit Petrov told Simon Cosgrove and me about his love for collecting old newspapers and magazines, how he stacked them in folders and read and re-read them. That's how chemistry came to lose one scientist from its ranks but history gained a remarkable specialist in the study of the Soviet security agencies. We all know Nikita Vasilievich as the author and compiler of many works describing the structure and functions of Soviet security services from 1917 to 1991. This knowledge is very important to all of us today as people from these very special services continue to occupy seats of power. And these people, having gained access to the levers of power, act even more subtly than the preceding genergation of Chekists. "Logic is turned inside out, black is repainted white, and the crimes of the Soviet regimeare not condemned but justified," Nikita Petrov told us. "Today's attempt to recycle history and use it to educate people in the spirit of patriotism is untenable. Such a policy will only bring up a generation of cynics. However, people who can think for themselves will figure things out, they will see for themselves it is all one big lie."

Our guest on the podcast this week is Lev Aleksandrovich Ponomarev (pictured, left, with the late Andrei Babushkin). Lev Ponomarev is a human rights activist and head of the For Human Rights movement and a member of the Moscow Helsinki Group. He also participated in the creation of the Memorial Human Rights Center. As a legal entity, the For Human Rights Movement was liquidated by a November 2019 decision of the Russian Supreme Court. Lev Ponomarev became one of the first private individuals to be included in the registry of "media foreign agents" when the Russian Ministry of Justice included him in the corresponding list on December 28, 2020.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

The questions we ask Lev Ponomarev include:

1 Andrei Babushkin, the well-known human rights defender, died recently - on the night of May 14. You knew him well for many years. What kind of person was he?

2 When did you leave Russia and what made you take this difficult decision?

3 What is the situation like for human rights defenders who still live and work in Russia today?

4 You were one of the organizers of the peace movement in Russia. How strong is this movement?

5 How difficult is it to continue your work outside of Russia?

6 How long can Russian propaganda be effective in the face of Russia's enormous human and material losses during the war?

7 What effect do sanctions have inside Russia?

8 Many people now use the word "fascism" to describe Putin's regime in Russia. Would you use this term?

9 You have advocated democratic reforms in Russia since at least the late 1980s. Why have these reforms - at least to date - failed so badly?

10 How do you see future developments?

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: " Lev Ponomarev said, 'The atmosphere in the country now is like, well, they’re not shooting us yet, but... What is there to say? I’ve been squeezed out, I have been forced to go abroad. The attacks were almost daily. But I wasn't beaten up once, thank God. I have to thank those guys who attacked me. They showed humanism, so to speak. Well, they poured something smelly over me, and I had to throw away my jacket and trousers. The cops stopped me in the metro, told me I was on the federal wanted list, and then they drove me around town and let me go. In general, I realized I had to leave.' In our latest podcast on Rights in Russia, Simon and I talked with Lev Ponomarev. We remembered Andrei Babushkin, who has died recently, discussed the human rights situation in Russia and considered possible scenarios for the future.

Our guest on the podcast this week is Andrei Kalikh, a human rights researcher, journalist, and activist with a special interest in the issue of corruption. In the past, Andrei worked as programme director at the Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights and he has been a board member of Perm Memorial Society. Until recently, Andrei lived in St. Petersburg. He recently left Russia and is currently in Israel.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

The questions we ask Andrei are:

1) When the war began on February 24, 2022, did it come as a surprise to civil society in Russia?

2) Why did the war begin on February 24, 2022?

3) There were many protests in Russia at the start of the war. You were involved in some of these protests. What was the atmosphere at the protests? How did the authorities respond?

4) Nowadays there are fewer protests. Why?

5) At the beginning of the conflict there were estimates that about 250,000 people had left Russia because of the war. Who were these people and why did they leave?

6) What help is available to those who have left Russia?

8) To what extent is there now an "anti-Russian" atmosphere in public opinion outside Russia because of the war?

9) Many people say one of the reasons the Russian military has not been successful in Ukraine is because of corruption. You worked on anti-corruption projects in Russia for many years. How strong is the corruption in Russia?

10) What do you think will happen in the next few weeks and months?

Sergey Nikitin writes on Facebook:

Russian human rights activist Andrei Kalikh took part in protests against the war unleashed by the Kremlin. It was not long after the first bombings and shelling of Ukraine: Andrei could not remain indifferent and on February 27 he stood in the centre of St. Petersburg holding a placard to express his opinion in the most peaceful way possible.

The police were brutal; no one was spared. They grabbed him, twisted his arm, threw him in a van and took him away.

“One of the reasons for the outbreak of this war was the lack of resistance from civil society, the opposition movement and the protest movement. We have all lost; we were weak. I feel personally responsible for this,” says Andrei Kalikh. A former programme director at the Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights, a board member of the Perm Memorial Society, a human rights and civil society activist and journalist, Andrei Kalikh was our guest on our latest podcast as part of the Rights in Russia project. We talked about many things, including protest and civic activism, not only in big cities, but also far from them. Andrei told us about the protest in the village of Siversky in Leningrad region, not far from where he lived until recently. And in this quiet dacha settlement, known to us from Nabokov's memoirs, as it turns out, there are people who care too. People who are ready to express their position publicly and find a variety of ways to do so. Andrei Kalikh, like many other human rights activists, was forced to leave Russia. He told us that for him living in Russia had become impossible and shameful. "Everything that had been achieved has been wiped out by this war,” he told us.

Our guest on the podcast this week is the lawyer Kirill Koroteev, head of international legal practice of Agora International Human Rights Group. Previously, Kirill worked as legal director at Memorial Human Rights Centre, where he specialized in handling cases before the European Court of Human Rights. Kirill graduated from the Higher School of Economics in Moscow and received his master's degree from the University of Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne, where he also taught public law.

The themes we discuss in the podcast include: the work of a Russian lawyer in international courts; Russia's exclusion from the Council of Europe and its consequences; Russia's war against Ukraine; the current brain drain from Russia; and the future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

The questions we ask Kirill Koroteev include:

1) As head of international legal practice at the Agora Human Rights Group you extensive experience in international courts and jurisdictions in various countries. How would you compare Russian lawyers today - especially human rights lawyers - with lawyers from other European countries?

2) Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe on March 16, 2022. This is only the second case of the exclusion of a state from the Council of Europe. Was there an alternative to this turn of events?

3) What will be the consequences of Russia's withdrawal for participants in Court proceedings – including those whose cases have already been decided, but not yet executed; those who have applied to the Court but whose cases are still in progress; and those who may still want to bring a case to the Court?

4) Russian lawyer and human rights activist Karinna Moskalenko has said that the inability of Russians to apply to the European Court would be ‘a punishment for ordinary people, not for the government.’ Do you agree with this point of view?

5) What is the future of the interstate case filed by the Ukrainian government on 28 February, as a result of which on 1 March the Court issued interim measures (under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court) requiring Russia to ‘refrain from military attacks on civilians and civilian objects, including homes, ambulances and other specially protected civilian objects such as schools and hospitals, and immediately ensure the safety of medical facilities, personnel and ambulances on the territory attacked or besieged by Russian forces.’

6) What is the legality of showing public videos of conversations and press conferences with prisoners of war. Is this a violation of the Geneva Conventions? Valentina Melnikova, for examples, has argued that such videos can save the lives of Russian POWs (see Valentina Melnikova’s interview with Gordeeva in the program "Tell Gordeeva").

7) Do you see any scenario in which Russia could rejoin the Council of Europe?

8) Could the exclusion of Russia could have a positive impact on the Court, given that Russia has one of the worst records so far as implementing the Court’s decisions is concerned?

9) According to existing estimates, as many as 250,000 people have left Russia because of the invasion of Ukraine. A great many of them are young professionals, including lawyers. Do you think this is a temporary phenomenon? Will people return to Russia in the near future? Or is this a development that will last for many years?

10) How do you see the future of human rights in the Russian Federation?

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “For this reason, a lot of class specialists in the legal practice of the ECtHR appeared in Rusia,” Kirill Koroteev told us, referring to the fact that the flawed judicial system in Russia led to a large increase in applications to Strasbourg. However, on 16 March 2022 Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe. This is the first case of exclusion of a State from the Council of Europe: only Greece left the Council in 1969, and then on its own initiative.

Simon Cosgrove and I asked Kirill if there had been any alternative to this course of events. His opinion is that there was an alternative: an even earlier exclusion of Russia from the Council of Europe. After all, the main purpose of this oldest European organization is cooperation among member states, not armed conflicts among them.

According to Kirill in 2019, the Council of Europe for the sake of 60 million euros actually did everything to permit the Russian authorities to remain members. If the Council had suspended Russia’s membership in 2019, as the organization’s own documents demanded, perhaps membership would have ended sooner.

Kirill, like many Russians, has left a country where the rule of law has long been dormant.

“All we’ve seen in the last 10-12 years,” he says, “is deterioration. What hope for the future is there?”

Our guest on the podcast this week is the Russian cartoonist Vyacheslav Shilov. He was born in 1970 in Potsdam, Germany. Until recently Vyacheslav Shilov, a member of the Union of Artists and Graphic Artists of the International Federation of UNESCO, lived in St. Petersburg. Today Vyacheslav with his family is outside Russia - in Europe. Vyacheslav Shilov in addition to his talent is known for his civic position. He has worked with the St. Petersburg Ombudsman Aleksander Shishlov (everyone remembers his wonderful human rights calendar). Vyacheslav also drew for Amnesty International: the cover of Amnesty’s report on "Agents of the People" was created by Vyacheslav Shilov.

The topics we discuss on the podcast include: his education and early career as an artist;

The questions we ask Vyacheslav Shilov include:

1) You have lived in Potsdam, Kaliningrad, St. Petersburg and now Europe. What has inspired you to move from place to place?

2) You graduated in journalism from St. Petersburg State University and yet we know you as an artist. Did they teach you to draw at the University?

3) How did you became involved with human rights activists?

4) You have drawn for many newspapers (Nevskoe Vremya, Vecherniy Peterburg, Smena). Have you experienced censorship in your work?

5) Are there differences of opinion among St. Petersburg artists (and not just cartoonists)? Is there a division between "patriots" and "regime critics"?

6) You have recently left Russia with your family after receiving threats. When did these attacks increase in intensity?

7) How do you assess the situation in Russia? Are all people engaged in the arts leaving or planning to leave? A lot of people compare the current situation with the emigration to Constantinople in the 1920s or to the ‘Philosophers’ Steamship’ when intellectuals left Russia after the revolution. Do you agree with these analogies?

8) How do you see the future of human rights activism in Russia? What awaits the country and the world?

9) What plans do you have while you are in Europe?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “There were several reasons for our departure,” Vyacheslav Shilov said. “The final straw, after which I no longer wished to remain in Russia, was the fact that in the school where we had enrolled our son (it’s a good school, of high quality, with good facilities) they began to give political education to the children, talking about the glorious victories of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.”

Slava Shilov, our guest on our latest podcast, is a St. Petersburg artist, a great caricaturist and a brilliant graphic artist, told us that when he and his family flew from St. Petersburg to Istanbul, several associations with the past of our motherland surfaced in his mind. These were the ‘Philosophers’ Steamship’ and the exodus to Constantinople. The passengers on the only voyage that day, the voyage to that very Constantinople, were quiet, intelligent people.

Involuntarily comes to mind the history of a hundred years ago, when more than 150 000 people left Russia on 126 ships. And the ‘Philosophers’ Steamship’ on which in 1922 almost three hundred people left Russia, deported by the Kremlin authorities. ‘The future has been stolen,’ says Vyacheslav Shilov, one of the thousands of Russians who left a country that has become an aggressor, a country that has become a disgrace.

For how long?

You can help Vyacheslav Shilov by buying his work at https://cartoonagency2.blogspot.com/2020/06/artoon.html

(c) Viacheslav Shilov - illustration for Amnesty International report "Russia: Agents of the people: Four years of "foreign agents" law in Russia: Consequences for the society

Our guest on the podcast this week is the Russian civil society activist, now living in Talinn, Estonia, Evgenia Chirikova. Evgenia Chirikova is especially well known for her campaign to save the Khimki Forest and she was leader of Ecological Defence (Ecoborona) in Moscow region. She was also a member of the organizing committee for Strategy 31 and a member of the Coordinating Council of the Russian Opposition. You can learn more about her work today at: activatica.org.

The topics we discuss on the podcast include: the invasion of Ukraine by Russian troops, public opinion in Estonia, what the West is doing, what needs to be done to help, why things have come to this, the role of Vladimir Putin, prospects for the future.

Our questions to Evgenia:

1) What does the public in Estonia think about the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

2) Boris Nemtsov was a great friend of Ukraine and was killed shortly after the annexation of Crimea. Do you think he imagined that would be such a full-scale invasion could occur?

3) How do you think Russian civic activists are doing? Many activists are leaving, laws are becoming more repressive. People are being detained and jailed. How do you assess the situation for Russian civil society?

4) Why do you think Putin decided to take this extraordinary step of invading a neighbouring country?

5) How is the West reacting? Are the EU and the U.S. doing enough? What is the impact of economic sanctions?

6) What should the general public in the West do?

7) How will Putin's regime change as a result of this war? Is there a possibility that the regime will not survive?

8) What do you think will happen in the coming days and weeks in Ukraine and Russia?

9) How do you see the future of human rights activism in Russia, what awaits the country and the world?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “It pains me very much that right now some kind of universal evil is coming from Russia, from my homeland.” Russian civil society activist Evgenia Chirikova, who moved to Estonia several years ago, found an hour to talk with Simon Cosgrove and me. Zhenya says from Tallinn, where she now lives: “We need to help refugees, we need to do a lot of organisational work.” Zhenya told us that when asked "Who is to blame for this" her answer is that we tried to stop Putin with all our might. But we had a very weak civil society that had been decimated during the preceding decades of totalitarianism. "People of my generation - we were actually the first to try to organize movements, to resist unfair elections. But we also saw the cooperation of Western politicians with Putin, a kind of Schröderization of the West. They were feeding Putin." In our conversation Zhenya Chirikova recalled speeches she made in the European Parliament and in the British Parliament where she asked the Western countries not to buy oil and gas from Putin, not to support this corrupted regime. "People laughed at me, said it was real politik. It turns out that we raised this monster together with the West, and now we all have to clean it up together.

THIS PODCAST IS NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

FOR THE PRESENT TIME WE HAVE REPLACED THE PODCAST WITH MIKHAIL SAVVA WITH A PODCAST WE RECORDED IN NOVEMBER 2020.

Our guest on the podcast this week is Mikhail Valentinovich Savva. Mikhail Savva is a human rights activist, political scientist, and former professor at Kuban State University. In 1993 Mikhail Savva began working in the administration of the Krasnodar region and then later in the Federal Ministry of Nationalities Affairs and Regional Policy - a position from which he resigned in connection with the first Chechen war. From January 2001, Mikhail Savva served as director of grant programmes at the Southern Regional Resource Centre, an NGO, and he was also a member of the Krasnodar Region Public Oversight Commission to monitor human rights in places of detention. In April 2013 a politically motivated criminal case was initiated against Savva under Article 159(3) of the Criminal Code ("Fraud on an especially large scale"). In April 2014, a Krasnodar district court gave him a three-year suspended sentence. Since 2015 Mikhail Savva has lived in Kiev where he is chair of the board of the Sova Expert Group, an NGO registered in Ukraine.

The recording is from 4 March 2022

The topics we discuss in the podcast include: the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the current situation in the conflict, what the West is doing, why things have come to this, Putin as a leader, public opinion in Ukraine and Russia, and what will happen in the short and long term.

The questions we asked Mikhail are:

• ·         What is the current situation in the conflict? Where is the front line - if there is one?
• ·         The Ukrainian troops have put up very strong resistance. How is Ukrainian public opinion reacting?
• ·         How do people in Ukraine assess the quality of Russian military forces - human and technical?
• ·         Where do people get their information about the course of the war in Ukraine? Are there reliable sources?
• ·         What do we know about Russia's plans in the coming days - and months?
• ·         What is the West doing? And should it be doing more?
• ·         There are many reports of Russian troops bombing civilian areas. Some talk about the need for a no-fly zone by NATO to protect civilians. Is this realistic?
• ·         How do you feel about Putin's reference to nuclear weapons?
• ·         In retrospect, why has Putin invested so much – great economic and human resources and even his political future - in this destructive military adventure?
• ·         Watching videos of Putin talking to his ministers in Moscow in an empty hall or at the end of a long table, one gets the impression that he is a very isolated leader. Especially when compared to Volodymyr Zelensky. What do you think?
• ·         What do you think will happen in the short and long term?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

The guest on our latest podcast is Dmitry Piskunov, a lawyer and human rights activist from Russia who works for the Moscow-based human rights organization OVD-Info. OVD-Info monitors politically motivated prosecutions, with a particular focus on the right to freedom of assembly. Previously, Dmitry worked for the Committee against Torture, a human rights organisation based in Nizhny Novgorod. He was also a member of the Moscow Public Oversight Commission.

This podcast was recorded on 22 February 2022

The topics we discuss include: the work of a human rights lawyer, the work of OVD-Info, the most important human rights issues in Russia today, and what’s coming in the near future and in the long term.

The questions we ask Dmitry are:

• Where does your interest in jurisprudence and human rights in particular come from?
• What types of cases are you currently working on?
• How has the human rights situation in Russia changed in recent years? What examples can you give?
• To what extent does the legislation on foreign agents negatively affect the work of civil society organizations?
• To what extent has anti-extremist legislation become an instrument of political repression?
• What role does the European Court of Human Rights play? And how do you see the relationship between this court and Russia? And with the Council of Europe?
• What do Russian citizens know about the Russian leadership’s intentions toward Ukraine?
• What will happen if there is a war? Will the population support such a policy?
• What is your prognosis for the future of human rights in Russia?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “No one wants war. And if there is anyone who wants it, it’s radicalized people who hold nationalist views. I don’t think this is the dominant view in Russian society,” said Dmitry Piskunov in an interview shortly before the aggressive attack by the Russian armed forces and the start of the invasion of Ukraine. “The actions of the Russian authorities do not deserve support. Nevertheless, I think only a small part of the Russian public will express their dissatisfation. Most will be afraid. Most of those who can organize protests will keep in mind that now there is a possibility to be prosecuted for treason or for extremism. At any moment, they can start branding individuals as foreign agents, especially in relation to dissemination of information about the army.”

Now all the social networks and news feeds are full of information about the army. Law enforcement authorities in Russia are merciless, threatening and intimidating. Peaceful anti-war protests are brutally suppressed by police. The Kremlin is at war with the Ukrainian people. It is also at war with the Russian people, on whom, however, it has not yet dropped bombs and which it has not yet crushed with the caterpillars of tanks. Dmitry sees the future of the human rights movement in Russia in a grim light. He speaks about the possibility of Russia`s isolation from the rest of the world and the likelihood that Russia may withdraw from the Council of Europe and the European Convention of Human Rights. “How close that prospect is, I can’t say,” Dmitry said when we spoke last Tuesday. A few hours later, war broke out.

Our guest this week on the podcast is Andreas Umland, a political scientist and an expert in modern Russian and Ukrainian history and politics. He lives in Kiev and teaches at the National University of the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. Andreas is a senior expert at the Ukrainian Institute for the Future in Kyiv and a research fellow at the Swedish Institute of International Relations in Stockholm. He has written extensively on the development of post-Soviet countries, including on the extreme right and on nationalism.

The topics we discuss include: the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, the situation on the borders, the threat of a Russian invasion, how decisions are made in Russia, reactions in Ukraine and the West, and what is to come.

The questions we put to Andreas Umland include:

1) What is the current situation on the Russian-Ukrainian border and on the Belarusian-Ukrainian border?

2) What is the motivation for the concentration of Russian troops?

3) What is the purpose of the "negotiations"?

4) What is the decision-making process inside Russia?

5) Are there divisions within the Russian elite?

6) What is Russian public opinion and does it play a role?

7) What reactions are there in Ukraine to what is happening?

8) How is the West reacting?

9) What do you think will happen next in the short term? And what will happen in the long term?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: Simon Cosgrove and I spent an hour in an interesting conversation with Andreas Umland, a political scientist who studies modern Russian and Ukrainian history and lives in Kyiv and who has a very interesting perspective on today’s situation. “I think February will be a tense month,” Andreas says. “The Olympics are coming to an end, and these exercises that Russia is holding in Belarus – by the end of February it will be clear whether there will be a military escalation or not. I hope not.” Speaking about the future, Andreas says: “Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy will remain the same in the future regardless of whether Zelensky is re-elected or not, whether Poroshenko returns, or maybe Klitschko becomes president. Personalities may change, but the direction of policy will not change. In Russia it is rather the opposite. If personalities change there, the whole regime could change. It may, by the way, change for the worse. Anything is possible there, from fascism to liberalism.” Andreas Umland lives in Kiev and teaches at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. Andreas has written extensively on the development of post-Soviet countries, including articles on the extreme right and nationalism.

Our guest this week on the podcast is Vitaly Ponomarev, head of the Central Asia programme of the Memorial Human Rights Centre. Since 2005 Vitaly Ponomarev has also been head of the Centre’s monitoring programme, ‘Combating fabrication of criminal cases of Islamic extremism in Russia.’

In the podcast we discuss the human rights situation in the countries of Central Asia, the relationship between Russian policy in the area of human rights and that of the Central Asian countries, the situation of refugees and the fabrication of criminal cases of Islamic extremism in Russia. 

The questions discussed are:

1) Where does your interest in eastern countries come from?

2) How do human rights in the Russian Federation compare with those in Central Asia?

3) To what extent do Russia and the countries of Central Asia copy each other’s policies in the area of human rights - for example Russia and Tajikistan or Turkmenistan or Uzbekistan?

4) There are reports that there are a large number of religious and political prisoners in Uzbekistan. Could you shed some light on this situation?

5) What is the situation of refugees persecuted in Central Asia and Russia? How realistic is the threat of forced return in the post-Soviet space?

6) You have been banned from entering Kyrgyzstan since 2017. How did this come about and how common is this phenomenon in relation to researchers such as yourself?

7) To what extent are anti-extremist laws and practices based on the Russian model being used as a tool of suppression?

8) Please tell us about the monitoring programme "Countering fabrication of criminal cases of Islamic extremism in Russia. How does it work and what are the main trends in this area?

9) Does this mean Russia is drifting towards the East? How do you see the perspectives for human rights in Russia?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website, SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: Central Asia is a region that includes Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. In Soviet times, it was called ‘Central Asia and Kazakhstan.’ Simon Cosgrove and I recently spoke with an expert on the region, Vitaly Ponomarev, head of the Central Asia programme at Memorial Human Rights Centre. At the same time, he has headed the Centre’s monitoring programme ‘Countering fabrication of criminal cases of Islamic extremism in Russia’ since 2005. The five countries have chosen different models of development, and the range - Vitaly Ponomarev explained to us - is large: from Turkmenistan with its totalitarian regime to Kyrgyzstan. "These are different countries, different cultures, and the more time passes since the collapse of the USSR, the more these differences become apparent. When mass repression began in Uzbekistan in the late 1990s, Russia was a relatively democratic country. Now there is this metamorphosis: Russia is becoming more and more repressive. In some aspects of criminal law, Russia has already surpassed in terms of certain restrictions some of the countries of Central Asia that we once cited as examples of serious human rights violations." Vitaly believes that Central Asian countries these days are often borrowing from Russian experience, in terms of the the toolkit for suppressing dissent, including both legislation and law enforcement practices related to so-called anti-extremism legislation. 

This week our guest on the podcast is Konstantin Aleksandrovich Kotov, a Russian computer programmer and civil society activist. In 2019 Konstantin Kotov was the second person to be convicted under the so-called ‘Dadin’ Article 212.1 that was added to the Russian Criminal Code in July 2014 – ‘Repeated violation of the established procedure for organizing or holding a meeting, rally, demonstration, march, or picket.’

The topics of our conversation include: the Russian judicial and penitentiary systems, and the current state of human rights in Russia.

The questions we are discuss are:

Why did you become a civic activist?

How unexpected was your arrest, prosecution and imprisonment in 2019? How did you feel at the time?

Your arrest and sentence caused a great public outcry. What did this support mean to you?

You and the defendant in the New Greatness case, Anna Pavlikova, were married in the building of the Matrosskaya Tishina detention centre where you were held. How did this happen?

On 20 April 2020, Moscow City Court reduced your sentence from four years in prison to one year and six months. Through all this time how did you see the work of the Russian legal system, including the President’s intervention?

What has been your experience of the Russian penitentiary system?

How do you assess the current situation in Russia in terms of human rights?

What needs to be done to improve the human rights situation in the country? What is the role of civil society and civic activists?

What are the prospects for the development of human rights protection in Russia?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on SoundCloud, Spotify, iTunes, Google Podcasts, Anchor and YouTube. 

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: 

“It probably started with the protest on Bolotnaya Square. I was at Bolotnaya, I was at Sakharov Prospekt, I participated in all the peaceful protests that took place in 2011-2012 in Moscow. I had a job, I was a programmer. The turning point was 2018: Oleg Sentsov and his hunger strike. His act touched me deeply: a man risking his life to save others.”

Simon Cosgrove and I continue to record our podcasts – conversations with human rights activists, civic activists, lawyers and journalists. Yesterday our interviewee was Konstantin Kotov, the second person convicted under the so-called ‘Dadin’ Article 212.1, added to the Russian Criminal Code in July 2014. He was sentenced to 4 years in prison, but was released a year and a half later, in December 2020. The colony was the same Penal Colony in Pokrov where Aleksei Navalny is now imprisoned.

“Your day in the colony is strictly regulated: from 6 a.m., when you get up, until 10 p.m., when you go to bed, you don’t belong to yourself. “

Among other things, Konstantin talked about his experience in prison: “Apart from inspections, sweeping pathways, and other things, you are also obliged to watch TV. Moral support came from letters that I still keep. Many of them came from Amnesty International activists from abroad.”

This week our guest on the podcast is Ivan Pavlov, a human rights lawyer specializing in freedom of information and treason cases. For many years, Ivan Pavlov headed the civil society group Team 29, which also worked to promote freedom of information in Russia.

The topics of our conversation today are the persecution of lawyers in Russia, the rule of law, what reforms are needed, the history of Team 29, the right of association and the future of human rights in Russia.

The questions we discuss include:

1. You are one of Ivan Safronov's lawyers. Both you and Evgeny Smirnov, another of Safronov’s lawyers, are forced to live outside Russia. Question: why exactly are these measures being taken against lawyers now?

2. Is the legal professional community able to stand up for itself?

3. Has Russia ever been a country where the rule of law existed?

4. What needs to be done to bring the country closer to the rule of law? What are the main steps that need to be taken to achieve this?

5. Can you tell us something about the history of Team 29? When was it created? What did it accomplish? Why was it shut down?

6. We are all following the Memorial case. One gets the impression the Russian authorities today do not want any independent civil society organizations to exist. What are the consequences of this policy for Russia? What is a country without civil society?

7. Realistically speaking, what are the prospects for fair trial in the Russian Federation?

8. What prospects are there for human rights in general? Are you an optimist or a pessimist?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "I remember well the 1990s when we crossed a certain threshold, everyone more or less attained a degree of material well-being and began to think about having some rights, about restoring democratic values in the country. I saw that the judicial system was developing, there were some hopes. This trend lasted until about 2004 or 2005, but then developments took a rather different direction. Every person looks for some stability in their life, something on which to base their decisions. In a society governed by the rule of law, that stable basis is the law. A state where there is the rule of law is considered the most stable. But if the law is not stable, and the only ‘stability’ is that a single person has been in power for a long time, it becomes easier for people to look for the signals that come from that one person rather than to the law, which is one thing today and another tomorrow. Officials today are not guided by the law, but by signals that come from that one person. The ability to change by democratic means those in power ensures the quality of life in a democracy." This is what the human rights lawyer Ivan Pavlov, who specializes in freedom of information and treason cases, told us. For several years, Ivan was the head of Team 29, an informal association of lawyers and journalists that fought the growing lack of transparency of the state in Russia. I vividly remember that in Soviet times, wherever I went to apply for a job, the hiring process necessarily included a visit to the First Department, a room with an iron door, where - as a rule - some retired man with a crazy look was sitting. These First Departments actually embodied the closed nature of the state, the total control over everything: why the hell do you need the First Department in the offices of a building restoration organisation where I worked in my youth? Ivan Pavlov in our conversation mentioned his team's new project, which he called the First Department. On Monday, he told a wider audience: "The First Department of the state bodies was engaged in the classification of documents and protection of state secrets. Often what was going on behind closed doors in the First Departments had little to do with the law and was simply arbitrary. Our First Department will fight to ensure that employees of all first departments throughout the country comply with the law, so that they do not violate your rights." Listen to our conversation with Ivan Pavlov, who temporarily left Russia but continues to do his fantastic work.

Simon Cosgrove adds: ‘For further information about the past week in Russia, visit our website here.’

Today is a special day: 10 December - Human Rights Day, and our best wishes to all who are listening! This week our guest on the podcast is Sergei Anatolievich Pashin, a retired Russian federal judge, Honoured Lawyer of the Russian Federation and a member of the Moscow Helsinki Group. 

The topics discussed on the podcast include the reform of the justice system in Russia, trial by jury, and whether there is a fair judicial system in the country. 

The questions we ask include:

1) Is the judiciary an independent and autonomous branch of state power in Russia? To what extent did the judicial reforms of the nineties achieve their goals?

2) Is it likely that with a critical mass of unjust verdicts, society will explode? Or will irregularities and violations always be tolerated?

3) You were one of those who initiated and supported the introduction of jury trials. What has been the fate of its enforcement?

4) Recently the head of the Investigative Committee Aleksandr Bastrykin, speaking at Moscow Legal Week said: "From the idea of 'the individual as the highest value, which has above all rights', we should return to the classical understanding of the individual as the subject of a set of rights and duties. Why is there such a stress on duties all the time?

5) What are the prospects for fair justice in the Russian Federation?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “In many respects, the fairness of the justice system is a private matter, a matter of individual decent judges, decent investigators (there are such investigators, I knew them), and decent policemen (there are such people, too). That is, in any system there are decent people. But it is another thing that they can be discouraged from practicing justice,” said Sergei Anatolievich Pashin. About this, and much more, Simon Cosgrove and I talked with Sergei Pashin in our podcast. We were very lucky that Sergei Pashin was able to give an hour of his time to talk to us. Everyone knows that Pashin is a retired federal judge, one of the initiators of jury trials in Russia, an Honoured Lawyer of the Russian Federation, a member of the Moscow Helsinki Group (MHG), author of the 1991 Constitutional Court Act, and a very busy man. Since 2008, Pashin has been teaching at the Law Department of the Higher School of Economics. Or rather, alas, it’s now necessary to say – was teaching. At the end of November 2021 Pashin suddenly received notice of dismissal and from 24 December he will cease to be an employee of this educational institution: the university terminated contracts with two professors of the Faculty of Law - Sergei Pashin and Gennady Esakov. From 2011 to 2021 the students of the HSE recognized Sergei Pashin every year as the best lecturer - and deservedly so. It was extremely interesting talking with Sergei Anatolievich, as you can judge for yourself. 

Simon Cosgrove adds: ‘For further information about the past week in Russia, visit our website here.’

This week we our guest on the podcast is Svetlana Astrakhantseva, executive director of the Moscow Helsinki Group. Svetlana Astrakhantseva is an economist, lawyer and law professor, and human rights activist. She has been working with the Moscow Helsinki Group since 2008 and has been executive director of MHG since 2016. She is co-coordinator of the Group for Assistance to the Russian-Ukrainian Human Rights Dialogue and a member of the Coordination Council of the Civic Solidarity International Platform.

The topics discussed on our podcast are: why be a human rights defender in today's Russia; what MHG does; whether there is a dialogue today between the human rights community and the authorities; is civic oversight relevant today in Russia; and the prospects for human rights in Russia.

The questions we ask Svetlana Astrakhantseva are:

1) What brought you to the Moscow Helsinki Group? Why did you become a human rights activist?

2) The mission of the MHG is to promote human rights and democracy in Russia, expose human rights violations and ensure that Russia complies with its international human rights obligations. To what extent is monitoring and pressure on the authorities possible nowadays, when the Kremlin is putting so much pressure on human rights NGOs?

3) Liudmila Alekseeva, one of the founders of the MHG, was known for her ability to conduct dialogue with representatives of the authorities (Kolokoltsev, Putin). How far is it possible now to continue dialogue in the way that Liudmila Alekseeva did?

4) A workshop on civic oversight of the police is planned for December this year in the Krasnodar region, with a face-to-face meeting planned to be held in Sochi. Do the authorities put obstacles in your way?

5) What are the prospects for human rights in Russia?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: Simon Cosgrove and I spoke with Svetlana Astrahantseva, Executive Director of the Moscow Helsinki Group – MHG:

“It’s always been important to me to help people, ever since I first became a Young Pioneer. You always turn around and help someone who’s in trouble.”

“You don’t become a human rights activist. It’s a kind of state of mind.”

“While working in business, I kept asking myself the question: why aren’t our laws working?”

“I came to MHG as an ordinary employee, a specialist in finance. And when I came here, after getting to know people and reading books, I realized that I was finally in the place that was right for me. It was easy to get better every day around these people. It was fate that brought me to MHG.”

Simon Cosgrove adds: ‘For further information about the past week in Russia, visit our website here.’

This week our guests are Victoria Ivleva, photographer, journalist and writer, and Yury Samodurov, civic activist, publicist and co-founder of Memorial. Both Victoria and Yury were detained on 20 November on Pushkin Square in Moscow for participating in single-person protests against the closure of Memorial. Both were held in a police station for two days and then fined by a court.

This week’s podcast concerns the future of Memorial and the law on foreign agents, the freedoms of association, assembly and expression, the procedures for detaining protesters, the behaviour of police, the conditions in detention and the practices of courts in such cases.

The specific topics discussed in the podcast include: the authorities’ moves to close the International Memorial Society and the Memorial Human Rights Centre; protests; arrests; trials; conditions of detention; what will happen to Memorial; other impressions of events.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “One of the best things we managed to achieve during perestroika that has survived to this day is Memorial.” These words by Yury Samodurov were supported by Victoria Ivleva and marked the start of our latest podcast with two guests who had very recently left their place of detention. The Moscow police had charged the two human rights activists with organizing “a public mass event with more than 10 participants” and locked them in cells for two days as dangerous criminals. Their “crime” consisted of participating in single-person protest pickets in defence of Memorial. The fines the two were given differed in size: Victoria Ivleva (150,000 roubles) was fined an order of magnitude higher than Yury Samodurov (20,000 roubles). The conditions of detention at the police station were humiliating: no toilets in the cell, a ban on toothbrushes, disgusting food, and the rudeness of some uniformed officers who demanded that glasses, watches and boots (or at least the laces) all be removed, A sum covering both fines was collected very quickly after Ivleva and Samodurov were released. Public support, support from civil society, is as important in individual cases as in the defence of civil society organizations. Including Memorial.

Simon Cosgrove adds: ‘For further information about the past week in Russia, visit our website here.

Our guest this week on the podcast is Grigory Melkonyants. Grigory Melkonyants is a Russian human rights activist, lawyer and co-chair of Golos, the movement to protect voters' rights. This week’s topics are freedom of association in Russia, the law on foreign agents, the significance of the attack on the Memorial Society and whether free and fair elections are possible in the country.

The questions discussed in the podcast include the following: designation of Golos as a ‘foreign agent’; the imposition of ‘individual media foreign agent status’ on Golos associates; the quality of electoral law and practice in Russia; the attacks on Memorial; why these attacks have happened now; plans for a civil society conference; the future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook:  “Democrat Steve Cohen, co-chairman of the Helsinki Commission, and Republican Joe Wilson, member of the Helsinki Commission, submitted a draft resolution to the U.S. Congress on November 18 this year, one paragraph of which reads: “According to the Russian non-governmental organization Golos and independent electoral analysts, approximately 27,000,000 votes, accounting for 37 percent of the official total, were fraudulent, making the plebiscite the most manipulated vote in the modern history of the Russian Federation.” Golos for Fair Elections, a meticulous and professional organization, has long annoyed lovers of fraud: it is not without reason that many believed that Sidankin’s ‘law’ on ‘foreign agents’ was concocted in the first place to kill off Golos. In April 2013 the Russian authorities labeled the organization a ‘foreign agent’, and in 2016 they ‘liquidated’ it. But Golos’s voice cannot be killled off or ‘liquidated.’ Golos still found a way to continue its work, after which officials designated them twice more as agents, creating another registry of ‘foreign spies’ in which the Golos movement was the first to be entered. The recent stunt with the branding of the organisation Fair Elections also tells much about the implacable Russian authorities, who are trying to undermine all those who work to protect the rights of voters, who help Russian citizens participate in independent election monitoring. After all, the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in Russia is its people. I am a huge admirer of these brave people, and Simon Cosgrove and I were lucky to have the opportunity to speak with Grigory Melkonyants, co-chair of Golos.”

Simon Cosgrove adds: ‘For further information about the past week in Russia, visit our website here.

This week on the podcast we discuss the current situation around Memorial and the moves by prosecutors to close down two organisations: the International Memorial Society and Memorial Human Rights Centre. Our guests on the podcast are Sergei Davidis and Jens Siegert. Sergei Davidis is head of the programme in support of political prisoners at the Memorial Human Rights Centre, an organisation of which he is also a board member. Jens Siegert is a German journalist, writer, and political scientist who has lived in Moscow for many years, was formerly head of the Böll Foundation office in Russia, and is a great friend and supporter of International Memorial.

The questions discussed in the podcast include:

What has happened? The International Memorial Society received two notices. The General Prosecutor's Office has filed a lawsuit to liquidate International Memorial, and the Moscow prosecutor's office is demanding that the Memorial Human Rights Centre also be closed down. Why such a ‘division of labour’ among prosecutors and why now? And what will happen to the regional branches of Memorial?

Just recently a group of people broke into the Memorial during a showing of a film about the Holodomor, then the police came, and the police searched Memorial’s premises and confiscated some of its equipment! Is there a connection between the events of October 14 (invasion + police) and November 11 (Supreme Court notice)?

How has the public in Russia and the international community reacted? Germany is said to have a special relationship with Memorial - what is the reaction there?

What is the significance of this attack on Russia's most prominent human rights organization?

What is the prognosis? What will happen to Memorial? What will happen to the human rights movement in Russia?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "The scale and intensity of recent repression is so great that each new episode of repression competes for public attention," Sergei Davidis told us during the podcast. "Each of these events individually should be enough to outrage society. But when several such events happen on the same day, society simply does not have the strength and resources to react. It should be remembered that the possibility of street protests due to coronavirus bans is also ruled out. Nevertheless, many people have spoken out. On the level of public statements, support is strong." As well as Sergei, Jens Siegert also took part in the podcast. He told us that at first in Germany the news about the prosecutors' moves against Memorial were a big shock. "Few people thought the wave of repression that has been going on in Russia for a year now could reach organizations like International Memorial. It's too big an organization, too important. Many people thought they would probably not touch it. We see a lot of solidarity with Memorial, and I think it will continue to grow. There were protests in front of the Russian embassy in Germany and there will be more. People who are not indifferent see this attack on Memorial as the return of the Chekist state." Sergei Davidis said: "We will fight to the last." I'm sure that many, many people will sign up to these words.

Simon Cosgrove adds: ‘For further information about the past week in Russia, visit our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Sergei Babinets. Sergei Babinets is a lawyer and head of the Orenburg branch of the Committee against Torture, whose head office is in Nizhny Novgorod.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: How did someone who had intended to work in the prosecutor’s office went to work for a human rights organisation? How does the work of the Committee Against Torture vary in terms of city and region (Moscow, Grozny, Orenburg)? How did you become a journalist (with Ekho Moskvy in Orenburg)? What are the risks that face a human rights defender in Russia today? Is the work of a human rights defender at the Committee Against Torture equally risky across the country? What do you think of the recent revelations of torture in Saratov region penal colonies? To what extent is the state a positive and reliable partner in the work against torture? What is the future of the human rights movement in Russia in the light of what is happening in the country now?

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud, Podcasts.com, Spotify, iTunes and Anchor.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: He dreamed since childhood of protecting people from criminals, following in the footsteps of his soldier-grandfather and his father, who worked in the police force for 25 years. After receiving a law degree, he decided to work in the prosecutor's office, which oversees all law enforcement bodies. Four years as an assistant prosecutor and attempts to join the prosecutor's office as a full-time employee led him to realise that the prosecutor's office didn't really seem to want him. The search for a job where Sergei Babinets could realize his dream led him to the Committee against Torture. Many years ago, I met Sergei in Moscow. He had just started working in the Moscow office of the famous Committee against Torture and he called on us at Amnesty International. Since then, I have kept in touch with Sergei, who after Moscow worked in many cities: Nizhny Novgorod, Grozny and Orenburg. The possibilities to combat torture and protect victims of torture varies from region to region. While in the North Caucasus the office where Sergei worked was set on fire, if in Nizhny Novgorod the group’s exhibition was banned, if in Moscow ‘Basmanny Justice’ simply does not want to pay any attention to human rights activists, in Orenburg the Committee Against Torture can hold events on any topic - here there is no interest in opposing human rights defenders. Sergei Babinets successfully combines his human rights activities with his work at Ekho Moskvy radio in Orenburg: he is good at this work too, and therefore it’s very interesting to listen to him in our latest podcast.

This week our guest on the podcast is Marina Pisklakova-Parker. Marina Pisklakova-Parker is a Russian women's rights activist and writer. She was the founder of ANNA (Regional Organization for Assistance to Women and Children Victims of Domestic Violence), one of the first women's crisis centres in Russia to help victims of domestic violence. Marina has also addressed the problem of trafficking in women and children.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: the founding of ANNA, the first such centre in Russia; ANNA’s activities in the early years; the main activities of ANNA today; changes in perceptions of domestic violence in Russia since the early 1990s; the extent to which the state is a positive and reliable partner in working against domestic violence; religious attitudes to domestic violence; the future of human rights in general in Russia and domestic violence in particular.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: Marina Pisklakova-Parker: "This was not the first crisis centre. The ANNA centre appeared in parallel with one in St. Petersburg, and near the time the Sisters centre began working in Moscow. I created my first telephone hotline in 1992. The impetus for this work came from gender research, which became available to us only in post-Soviet Russia. I started to receive letters from victims. It was from these letters that my interest in the issue began, because no one talks about domestic violence. This is what drove me to do it.” In our conversation, Marina talked about the prospects for passing a law on domestic violence in Russia and about the connection between so-called ‘traditional values’ and violence against women. About the fact that citizens, alas, do not understand what rights they have and do not know how to use them. And about how ANNA helps. ANNA has accumulated huge experience in the fight against the scourge of domestic violence over three decades. The organisation has united specialists from the regions and countries of the former Soviet Union into an informal network which continues to grow and develop. They provide assistance, conduct monitoring, interact, educate themselves and others, and share their experiences. Only by joining together can gender-based violence be defeated.

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Valentina Dmitrievna Melnikova. Valentina Melnikova is a Russian human rights activist and politician, a graduate of the geology department of Moscow State University and a specialist in geochemistry, but better known to us all as the executive secretary of the Union of Committees of Soldiers' Mothers of Russia. Valentina Melnikova was one of the initiators of the Russian Research Centre for Human Rights established in 1990.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: how did a graduate of the geology department of Moscow State University became a human rights activist; the difference between the Committees of Soldiers' Mothers and the Union of Committees of Soldiers' Mothers; cooperation between the Russian military and the Union of Committees of Soldiers' Mothers; the notion that Committees of Soldiers' Mothers are intended to help people avoid military service; the role of Viktor Alksnis; the FSB’s recent decree on unclassified information dissemination of which can serve to designate organisations or persons as ‘foreign agents’; the human rights situation and the future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "I became a human rights activist overnight in December 1979, when I learned from a radio broadcast that Soviet troops had entered Afghanistan. My two sons were still little but I knew a bit about history and I decided that I will never send my children to the Soviet army led by crazy old folk. Valentina Dmitrievna Melnikova told Simon Cosgrove and me how her search for like-minded people, those who cared about their sons, led her to join the Soldiers' Mothers Committee in 1989. "They were energetic women from all over the Soviet Union, they knew what they wanted, and they achieved a lot through the then deputies of the Interregional Deputies Group of the USSR Supreme Soviet. In 1998 we set up an association called the Union of Committees of Soldiers' Mothers of Russia. Valentina Melnikova describes herself as an ‘informed optimist’ and believes that the prospects for human rights activities are not great: "Things will get tougher and tougher, more and more lawless. What is to be done about it? I don't know. I don't expect anything good. But on the other hand, all of us - Memorial Human Rights Centre, the Independent Psychiatric Association of Russia, the Union of the Committees of Soldiers' Mothers of Russia – what can we do if people keep coming for help? So we have to work, we have to fight.”

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Ernest Mezak, a well-known journalist and human rights activist from the Republic of Komi in Russia. He represents victims of law enforcement violations in courts at the national level and has also acted as a legal representative before the European Court of Human Rights in some 200 cases. In 2012 he won the Moscow Helsinki Group's Human Rights Award in the category "For defending human rights in courts." Previously, Ernest Mezak has worked for the Public Verdict Foundation.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: becoming a human rights defender; human rights in the Komi Republic; the role of the European Court of Human Rights in Russia; prosecutions for exercising right of assembly; Mezak’s prosecution for ‘insulting a judge’; the future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes.  The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: At Christmas 2007 Ernest Mezak was detained by two police officers. It was in Syktyvkar, the capital of the Komi Republic: Ernest was shoved into the so-called ‘dog-cage’, that is, into the back compartment of a police patrol car. Mezak later recalled: "It was very cold and dark in there. I spent 20 minutes in those conditions. Subsequently, I appealed my treatment conditions at Syktyvkar city court. And the most amazing thing happened: the court was sympathetic to my claim and found the detention conditions to be in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention prohibiting torture.” Our interlocutor this week, Ernest Mezak, is a human rights activist from the Komi Republic. He often represents victims of law enforcement violations in courts at the national level, and he has also acted as legal representative before the European Court of Human Rights in some 200 cases. In 2012, he won the Moscow Helsinki Group's Human Rights Award in the category "For Defending Human Rights in Courts. It is understandable that such stubbornness, sometimes bordering on obstinacy, cannot help but irritate people in law enforcement. I think in Syktyvkar he is well known and disliked by all officials. A few months ago in the Komi capital a criminal case was opened against Ernest for insulting a judge. His apartment was searched, and, as usual, all his computers, smartphones, flash drives and hard drives were confiscated. Mezak was summoned for interrogation. Ernest told us what has been happening to him – and about the prospects for the human rights movement in Russia.

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Grigory Vaypan. Until recently, Grigory was head of the Litigation Department at the Institute for Law and Public Policy where he led strategic human rights litigation before the Constitutional Court of Russia and the European Court of Human Rights. Since 2013, Grigory has been developing the practice of amicus curiae at the Constitutional Court of Russia. Grigory teaches seminars on constitutional litigation and writes articles on constitutional law and international law.

The topics discussed in the podcast include: Legal education in Russia and the U.S. (at Moscow State University and Harvard Law School); The Galina Starovoitova Fellowship at the Kennan Institute; Why become a lawyer/advocate specialising in human rights issues; Court cases; Institute for Law and Public Policy; The International Federation for Human Rights report: ‘Russia: Crimes Against History’; Last year's Constitutional Amendments; the European Court of Human Rights; The laws on ‘foreign agents’ and ‘undesirable foreign organisations’; Young lawyers in Russia today; The future of the justice system  and human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: Moscow University, Harvard Law School, and St. Petersburg University are stages in Grigory Vaypan’s education in law. In addition to these institutions, Gregory spent three months at the Kennan Institute as a Galina Starovoitova Fellow. "The task of the American educational system at Harvard is to intellectually inspire a person to accomplish things in their profession,” says Grigory Vaipan. “The Russian system of higher education is designed in a different way." Grigory has also worked at the Institute for Law and Public Policy, where he was involved in developing nonprofit jurisprudence related to human rights cases in the constitutional court. In addition, a recent report written by Grigory Vaypan for the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), entitled ‘Russia: Crimes Against History,’ has attracted the attention of the reading public. This document discusses ‘how the Russian state monopolizes history.’ The author with justice states that ‘Russia is one of the countries that has passed the largest number of laws suppressing freedom of expression on historical issues.’ These include a law against the ‘rehabilitation of Nazism.’ laws banning the use of Nazi symbols and attributes, laws against extremism and terrorism, and more. The latest news from the Kremlin ideological front, with its newly-formed Historical Enlightenment Commission - with the help of state law enforcement agencies fighting off all attempts to ‘falsify’ the facts - only confirms the importance and timeliness of Grigory Vaypan's report.

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Alena Vershinina, a journalist and former host of Ekho Moskvy radio who has also previously worked on Nastoyashchee vremya and now is with Radio Svoboda.

The topics discussed in the podcast include: Career - from Lipetsk to Moscow; The difficulties of working as a journalist in Russia; Harassment by the authorities; Trends in modern journalism in Russia; Journalism in the capital and in the provinces; The quality of journalism in modern Russia; Journalism and human rights; Journalists who have left the country; The prosecution of journalists; The ‘foreign agent’ label; Arrests, searches, and seizures of equipment; Comparing Soviet and Russian external broadcasting; The future of Russian journalism.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “What is happening in Russia now seemed impossible to us just a year ago,” says Alena Vershinina. “And now everyone is weighing the risks regarding their family members. After all, they seize all the technical equipment they can find during a search, not just what belongs to the journalist. And everyone is now wondering what can happen to your parents or grandparents.” Simon Cosgrove and I spoke with the journalist Alena Vershinina, who we know from Ekho Moskvy, Nastoyashchee vremya, and who now works for Radio Liberty. When I asked her what her prediction for the future would be, Alena said, "We don't even know how we're going to survive the next eight weeks with the Russian elections coming up. Every Friday we wait to see who else will be declared a foreign agent. We don't understand what will happen in three years: we don't even understand what will happen by the end of the year!" "Every move by the state authorities against the journalistic community gets its own answer,” Alena said, during a fascinating conversation. I recommend you listen to the recording to find out what answers intrepid Russian journalists give.

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is the well-known human rights activist, Lev Aleksandrovich Ponomarev. Lev Ponomarev is the head of the civil society project ‘For Human Rights’, chair of the Defence of Prisoners' Rights Foundation and also of the Hotline organisation, and a member of the Moscow Helsinki Group. In May this year Lev Ponomarev spoke at the International Conference ‘Anxiety and Hope. The 21st Century’ held in honour of the 100th anniversary of the birth of Andrei Sakharov. His speech, ‘We are not observers, we are participants’ can be heard on the website of the Sakharov Museum.  In this podcast we discuss some of the main points made by Lev Ponomarev in that speech.

The questions we discuss in the podcast include: Contemporary Russia and the Soviet past - where is the country heading? - What does it mean for the country if people from the security services are in power? - Dissidents and the political opposition face severe repressive measures: who are in the main the victims of the security services? – Recent legislation – The law on ‘foreign agents’ - Are ‘universal values’ alien to Russia? - Putin and Patrushev – ‘We are not observers, we are participants’ - What possibilities are there to work for human rights, free elections and the release of political prisoners in Russia today? – ‘We are many’: how many in fact? - How to participate in elections when candidates are banned? – The idea of a Civic Congress - Russia's future and the future of human rights.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “It is not politicians who are in power, it is the siloviki. In line with their worldview, they see only one solution to a problem. The use of force. Putting people in jail. Possibly even killing them. Generally speaking, any opponent of the authorities might be killed.” Our interlocutor, Lev Ponomarev, is so disliked by the Lubyanka and the Kremlin that the authorities and his organisations have labelled him a foreign agent, and even he himself was one of the first to receive the newly invented title of ‘an individual foreign agent,’ which is, without a doubt, complete nonsense. Lev Ponomarev is a kind and fair man, and even Viktor Shenderovich once said that, say, when Putin goes to jail, ‘Lev Aleksandrovich Ponomarev, the human rights defender, he will defend Putin’. Our interlocutor, recalling this remark, said: "I don't know whether I would defend him or not, but the situation is a very serious one.”

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Elena Belokurova. Elena is a political scientist specializing in the study of civil society and a civic activist from St. Petersburg. She is the director of the organization Mosty [‘Bridges’].

The questions discussed in this podcast include: early career; the NGO Bridges; Russian civil society in the 1990s; Russian civil society under Putin; comparison of Germany and EU with Russia in terms of civil society; the EU-Russia Forum; St Petersburg; examples of successful NGOs in the city; the law on ‘foreign agents’; the law on ‘undesirable’ organisations; the future of civil society and human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "They say it is necessary to build bridges, not walls. It is something that is relevant for both politicians and civil society activists. And while domestic politicians have recently been getting away with building walls, fortunately there are people building bridges, and there are many such people. Simon Cosgrove and I spoke last week with Elena Belokurova, director of Bridges. This is a long-standing organisation, in fact, for many years based in Ligovka Street, St. Petersburg, and still there now. They used to be known under a different name, but the wall builders forced a change of name. But what these people do does not change: they build bridges of peaceful international cooperation, and these bridges will serve to develop civil societies through international exchanges. These bridges will help broaden perspectives and unleash the creativity of many people, including through international experiences. Elena Belokurova told us about the many projects, achievements of Bridges, along with some ideas and plans for the future. Bridges: International Exchanges, Cooperation, Creativity has brilliant partners in many different countries and cities. The work continues."

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Gleb Bogush. Gleb Bogush is a lawyer, with a PhD in law, and an associate professor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow and an expert in international law.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: what it means to be an expert in international law; human rights in the practice of an international lawyer; the European Court of Human Rights and its place in the Russian legal system; Russia and the International Criminal Court; repressive legislation in Russia - laws on foreign agents, undesirable foreign organizations, and so on; legislation on ‘historical memory’, prosecution for ‘distortion of historical truth’; freedom of speech in Russia, including in academia; the meaning of constitutional amendments; the future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "Would Pinochet be arrested today in London? There are signs of a regression in international law: the ICC was created in the early 2000s, there was the Pinochet case, but the old sense of optimism has been replaced - unfortunately in life things go down as well as up." Last week, Simon Cosgrove and I spoke with Gleb Bogush, lawyer, PhD and associate professor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow and a specialist in international law. "I started with criminal law in Russia and other countries. I began to study international law later. Working in this field, I do not hide my respect and sympathy for human rights," Gleb told us. Our conversation touched on a great many topics, including the role of the European Court of Human Rights in Russia. Gleb Bogush pointed out: "The government wants to sit on two chairs at once, i.e. to participate in PACE on the one hand, and selectively refuse to execute the judgments of the ECtHR on the other. But the significance of the European Court is tremendous: for Russian citizens, it is an opportunity, albeit a slow and distant one, to find justice.” Talking about the latest legislative products of the State Duma, Gleb said, in particular: "What is happening, in my opinion, is following a strategy, it is a process that cannot stop. In fact, the authorities can no longer do anything else but produce these prohibitions. Everything is done to create a chilling effect, which creates a perception in society that certain topics are taboo, undesirable, that certain things shouldn't be discussed." In our podcasts at Rights in Russia Simon and I discuss whatever issues come to mind. And Gleb Bogush, our recent interlocutor, has certainly broadened our intellectual horizons. Take a listen, too.”

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Yury Vadimovich Samodurov. Yury Vadimovich is a Russian civic activist, writer, museum worker and public figure. He also has a PhD in geological and mineralogical sciences. Yury Vadimovich was one of the initiators of the Memorial Society and the Sakharov Museum and Public Centre. He himself was director of the Sakharov Museum from 1996 to 2008.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: writer and museum worker, initiator of various projects -and human rights activist? - why the topic of human rights is so relevant to Russia - a comparison between the Soviet period and contemporary Russia - Andrei Sakharov and today's Russia - Elena Bonner - reforms - Yegor Gaidar - a generation and its destiny - the future of human rights in Russia. 

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "Yury Samodurov does not consider himself a human rights activist. Frankly, I have a different opinion. After all, the UN definition says that: "A human rights defender is a term used to describe people who, individually or together with others, act to promote or protect human rights peacefully. Human rights defenders are identified primarily by what they do." Last week Yury Vadimovich told Simon Cosgrove and me a great many interesting things from his life: about his personal impressions from his meetings with A. D. Sakharov, with Elena Bonner, with Lev Ponomarev, with Konstantin Kotov, with many others: the list is long. I personally found it interesting to hear Yury Samodurov's opinion about Sakharov's death: "I had the thought that Sakharov was killed. I must say that this was my first thought back in December 1989. Sergei Grigoryants held the same opinion. And A. Sobchak, who himself died a strange death, wrote in 1989: 'I don't believe in the naturalness of Sakharov's death - it was too unexpected and very opportune for his political opponents.' We have learned a great deal in the past years that makes us think seriously about what happened then. Yury Vadimovich Samodurov is a very interesting interlocutor. The hour flew by unnoticed, we had time to touch on many subjects, and, probably, we should meet again. For now - here is our conversation".

Simon Cosgrove adds:  A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Yulia Fedotova, a lawyer with a PhD in law from the city of Ekaterinburg.

The issues discussed in the podcast include: the legal profession; legal specialization; the Russian judicial system; successful legal cases; major human rights problems in Russia today; the role of the European Court of Human Rights; the recent constitutional amendments; Russia and the Council of Europe; and the future of human rights in Russia.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: "Since childhood I was attracted to the criminal law, and I actually wanted to become a police investigator. But I couldn't accept a compromise with my conscience, work from 9 am for as long as they wanted and obey orders. So after an internship I changed my plans: I became a lawyer. A human rights lawyer." - these are the words of our interviewee this week, Yulia Fedotova, a lawyer with a PhD in law from the city of Ekaterinburg. In addition to her work in the capital of the Urals federal district, Yulia manages to work in Krasnodar region. In our conversation she interestingly compares the state of justice in these two regions, figuratively describing the law enforcement system of the sunny southern region as "like a big ball of snakes kissing." Her words are confirmed by two incidents when courts in Krasnodar tried to frame Yulia herself as a member of an organization the Russian authorities have been coquettishly calling "undesirable.' Yulia has filed fifty-three applications to the European Court of Human Rights (of which the court deemed 17 inadmissible, but accepted the rest) and has won many cases in the domestic courts. Fedotova is sharp-tongued, saying that a lawyer in today's Russia could be compared to someone diving to the depths of the Marianna Trench with a broken aqua-lung in bloody faeces. Simon Cosgrove and I listened with great interest to Yulia, and you can hear her stories, including how a nine-day sentence for Evgeny Roizman turned into one day thanks to the efforts of our interviewee."

Simon Cosgrove adds: "If you want to listen to this podcast on the podcasts.com website and it doesn’t seem to play, please download by clicking on the three dots to the right. A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website https://rightsinrussia.org/week-ending-18-june-2021."

This week our guest on the podcast is Sergei Davidis, a member of the board of the Memorial Human Rights Centre and director of the Centre's programme in support of political prisoners.

The questions discussed in the podcast include: Sergei Davidis' recent prosecution and jailing ['administrative arrest']; conditions of detention; application to the European Court of Human Rights; numbers of detentions and administrative and criminal cases following this year's protests; Evgeny Roizman, former mayor of Ekaterinburg; Aleksei Navalny; Amnesty International; politics and human rights; ECtHR; right of assembly; freedom of association; Anti-Corruption Foundation; application of extremism law; new legislation and human rights; future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website [https://www.rightsinrussia.org/category/podcasts/] or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes: "Sergei Davidis, a member of the board of Memorial Human Rights Centre, was seized in the entryway of his home. The explanation for such an act of gallantry by the police is simple: according to the Russian authorities, notification of an event is now considered to be organization of an event. If we are talking about the kind of event that the authorities in their own jargon call 'unsanctioned', then a person who reposts information about the protest will receive a visit early in the morning. Sergei spent eight days in a special detention centre where those sentenced to administrative detention are held. He was given a total of 10 days, but two of those 10 days were spent in police custody. Simon Cosgrove and I are people with little prison experience (mine is richer than Simon's, but I won't go into that now), so we were interested in what Sergei had to say. Sergei Davidis was good at building relations with cellmates who had nothing to do with Article 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offences. "None of them like the authorities, they don't approve of them, but they don't want to get involved in the fight." He successfully conducted - according to him - explanatory work to show what political institutions are and what political tools exist. "I did not see any aggression from the staff of the detention centre. Except for one moment, though it was not really aggression but overzealous performance of duty: one of the officers told me that wearing a T-shirt with the slogan 'No to political repression' in their honorable institution was unacceptable. Our podcast proved an interesting conversation with an interesting interlocutor on many topics, including Amnesty International's infamous decision to strip Navalny of his title of prisoner of conscience."

Simon Cosgrove adds: "If you want to listen to this podcast on the podcasts.com website and it doesn’t seem to play, please download by clicking on the three dots to the right. A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here: https://www.rightsinrussia.org/week-ending-21-may-2021/ "

This week our guest on the podcast is Elena Pershakova. Elena is head of the Legal Practice for Fundamental Freedoms department at the Public Verdict Foundation. She has been involved in human rights activities since 1999 and began her career in Perm. 

The questions discussed in the podcast include: freedom of conscience in Perm and in Russia (about Jehovah's Witnesses); how Russia's regions differ from one another in terms of the judicial system; the work of a human rights lawyer; Public Verdict Foundation; freedom of association in Russia; the law on 'foreign agents'; the Public Oversight Commissions; regional human rights ombudsmen; freedom of assembly in Russia; the role of the ECtHR in Russia; last year's amendments to the Constitution; Russia and the Council of Europe; the future of human rights in Russia.

This podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on our website [https://www.rightsinrussia.org/category/podcasts/] or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes: "Many years ago I questioned Sergei Borisovich Parkhomenko about his arrest outside the Moskvoretsky Court. At that time two different police officers wrote different reports on him and each said that he had detained Parkhomenko - but for different acts. Sergei Parkhomenko said he would challenge the decision in the Eurpean Court of Human Rights and that his case was being handled by Elena Pershakova, an excellent lawyer from Public Verdict Foundation, as he particularly emphasized. Six months ago, I learned that the ECtHR had found that Russia in this case had violated the rights to peaceful assembly and fair trial and ordered the Russian Federation to pay each of the detainees, including Sergei Parkhomenko, 5,000 euros in compensation. Sergei Borisovich said on this occasion: 'I would particularly like to express my gratitude and admiration for the tenacity and resolve of the lawyers Kirill Koroteev, Elena Pershakova and their colleagues who brought the case to a victorious end after all these years.' Last week Simon Cosgrove and I spoke with Lena about her work at Public Verdict, the human rights situation in Russia and in Perm, the role of the ECtHR, whether Russia will withdraw from the Council of Europe and much more. I took the opportunity to tell Lena how much I love her pictures of the Kama River from the 18th floor. Truly, Lena has many talents! "

Simon Cosgrove adds: "If you want to listen to this podcast on the podcasts.com website and it doesn’t seem to play, please download by clicking on the three dots to the right. A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here: https//rightsinrussia.org/week-ending-14-may-2021 ."

This week our guest on the podcast is Tatiana Glushkova. Tatiana is a lawyer with Memorial Human Rights Centre, a member of the programme, Human Rights Protection Using International Mechanisms, a member of the coordinating council of the Project to Provide Legal Aid to Transgender People and of the board of the ‘Stumul’ LGBT group.

The questions discussed in the podcast include: what it means to be a human rights lawyer in Russia today; what led Tatyana Glushkova to take up this work; the workload and pace of work; the main human rights issues in Russia today; the right to freedom of association in Russia; the law on foreign agents; the application to the European Court of Human Rights regarding the law on foreign agents; the role of the ECtHR in Russia; the significance of last year’s constitutional amendments; Russia and the Council of Europe; the future of human rights in Russia.

You can also listen to the podcast on our website [https://www.rightsinrussia.org/category/podcasts/] or on SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. 

The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “My entry into human rights work was, by and large, an accident. Having experience in a commercial legal structure, after graduating from Moscow State University I decided to find something different from what I had encountered during my years of study. The story of a friend about the non-profit organisation JURIX caught my attention. I was lucky – there was a vacancy and I went to join Anita Karlovna Soboleva and her team. I found the job much more interesting than working in a commercial firm.” Last week Simon and I spoke with Tatiana Glushkova, a lawyer in the programme ‘Human Rights Protection Using International Mechanisms’ at Memorial Human Rights Centre, where she is also a board member. Cases she has worked with range from summary executions in Chechnya to LGBT rights. “In Russia today there is so much work for human rights lawyers that the situation can be figuratively compared to patching up one hole while two new ones appear. And so on,” Tatiana told us. “You can do a tremendous amount of work, collect all the evidence, and the result will not be different from if you had done nothing at all.” But Tatyana Glushkova finds the strength to carry on her work: she is well known in the human rights world as a successful lawyer who works 25 or even 48 hours a day. It was very interesting for us to talk to Tatiana, and it’s great that she was able to find time to talk to us as well.“

Simon Cosgrove adds: "If you want to listen to this podcast on the podcasts.com website and it doesn’t seem to play, please download by clicking on the three dots to the right. A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here."

This week our guests on the podcast are Irina Borogan and Andrei Soldatov, well-known Russian journalists, creators of the website Agentura.ru and authors of the books The New Nobility, The Red Web and The Compatriots.

The topics we discuss on the podcast include: journalism in contemporary Russia; journalists’s safety; the role of Russia’s secret services domestically and on the world stage; disinformation; the history of post-Soviet Russia; the influence of Soviet political culture; Navalny’s poisoning; Amnesty International and Navalny; whether there is an on-going political crisis in Russia; and the future of human rights in Russia.

The podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on Rights in Russia [https://rightsinrussia.org/podcasts/], SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: “I like the way Andrei Soldatov and Irina Borogan write. I have read almost all their books: The New Nobility, The Red Web, and The Compatriots. They write in such a way that – frankly – I can’t tear myself away. Sometimes I didn’t want to wait for the Russian translation to come out, so I read the book in English. This was the case with their newest book. I first read The Compatriots: The Brutal and Chaotic History of Russia’s Exiles, Émigrés, and Agents Abroad and then got a copy of the Russian translation. At the very end of the book, along with the acknowledgements, I liked the authors’ heartfelt confession: “When we wrote this book we argued passionately, and sometimes very loudly, about every chapter.” In our new podcast Andrei and Irina didn’t argue at all, and expressed their stories and views quite mildly. And what they had to say, it must be said, was just as interesting, of course, as their books. Starting with the story of how they became journalists and ending with their assessment of investigative journalism in Russia today.

Simon Cosgrove adds: If you want to listen to this podcast on the podcasts.com website and it doesn’t seem to play, please download by clicking on the three dots to the right. A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.

This week our guest on the podcast is Sergei Golubok, a lawyer [advokat] from St. Petersburg. The topics we discuss on the podcast include: how to become a lawyer; lawyers and human rights; the rule of law; the European Court of Human Rights; conflicts between national and international law; impact of the reforms of the 1990s on the Russian legal system; the significance of the constitutional amendments introduced last year; reform of the Constitutional Court; the future of the Russian legal system and human rights in the Russian Federation.

The podcast is in Russian. You can also listen to the podcast on Rights in Russia [https://rightsinrussia.org/podcasts/], SoundCloud,  Spotify  and  iTunes. The music, from Stravinsky’s Elegy for Solo Viola, is performed for us by Karolina Herrera.

Sergei Nikitin writes on Facebook: A lawyer [advokat] should be a human rights defender by virtue of his work. And the hallmark of a lawyer [advokat] is that they don’t have a boss, they have clients. Our guest on the podcast this week, the lawyer Sergei Golubok, has a wealth of experience, including with bosses. Today Sergei is a member of the St Petersburg Bar Association and someone well known in the human rights world. Simon Cosgrove and I had time to discuss a great deal with our Sunday guest and are happy to share what Sergei told us. We discussed – and not without reference to events today – why there are regimes that do not live up to the obligations they took upon themselves. “Human rights treaties – unlike ordinary treaties – create a web of obligations rather than bilateral relations. And so regimes like Erdogan’s or Putin’s don’t really understand such obligations – why they should be implemented,” says Sergei Golubok, and adds: “This is a short-sighted point of view, because there are some things more important than momentary gain.” One of the biggest questions facing the Council of Europe today is what to do when Russia, along with a number of other countries, ignores ECtHR judgments. After all, there are no international riot police and no ECtHR bailiffs either. “I believe that the right thing to do in this situation would be to expel Russia from the Council of Europe. This would, in the first place, protect the Council of Europe itself. However, the Council of Europe has taken a different path, that of endless negotiations. It is the wrong approach, and the policy of appeasement of the 1930s is proof of that. It is not a solution to the problem, but an aggravation. Exclusion is the only legal remedy that can be applied”. We recommend listening to what Sergei Golubok has to say.

Simon Cosgrove adds: If you want to listen to this podcast on the podcasts.com website and it doesn’t seem to play, please download by clicking on the three dots to the right. A summary of some of the week’s events in Russia relevant to human rights can be found on our website here.