Global Freedom of Expression

Español العربية

The Case of Yevgeniy Kort

Closed Contracts Expression

Key Details

  • Mode of Expression
    Electronic / Internet-based Communication
  • Date of Decision
    November 3, 2016
  • Outcome
    Imprisonment
  • Case Number
    No.01-0354/2016
  • Region & Country
    Russian Federation, Europe and Central Asia
  • Judicial Body
    First Instance Court
  • Type of Law
    Criminal Law
  • Themes
    Hate Speech
  • Tags
    Discrimination, Incitement, Cartoons, Social Media

Content Attribution Policy

Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:

  • Attribute Columbia Global Freedom of Expression as the source.
  • Link to the original URL of the specific case analysis, publication, update, blog or landing page of the down loadable content you are referencing.

Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page.

Case Analysis

Case Summary and Outcome

The Zelenograd District Court of Moscow sentenced Yevgeniy Kort to one year in prison for inciting hatred toward non-ethnic Russians. The case arose after Mr. Kort shared, on his social media account, a cartoon that portrayed a well-known Russian nationalist pushing a famous Russian poet against a wall and uttering a xenophobic remark. The court relied upon expert opinion, witness testimony and other evidence, including books about Nazi soldiers found in Mr. Kort’s apartment, to reach its guilty verdict. His sentence was subsequently reduced to a fine of 200,000 rubles (about $3,400) on appeal.


Facts

Yevgeniy Kort claimed that he inadvertently published a cartoon on the Russian social media site VKontakte.  The cartoon depicted Maxim Martsinkevich, a well-known Russian nationalist, pushing Alexander Pushkin, a famous Russian poet of mixed-race, against a wall while calling him “churka” (a derogatory term used to refer to people with dark skin and complexion).

Mr. Kort alleged that he saved the image, as he saves a lot of content. However, when Mr. Kort saved the image, VKontakte automatically shared it to his network.

The prosecutor general charged Mr. Kort under article 282, section 1, of the Russian Criminal Code, which penalizes actions aimed at inciting hatred or hostility and denigrating human dignity on the basis of sex, race, nationality, language, origins, religious beliefs, or belonging to a social group.


Decision Overview

In making its ruling, the Zelenograd District Court of Moscow considered Mr. Kort’s interest in Nazi imagery online, and his negative opinions of Russia. In order to secure Mr. Kort’s conviction, the prosecutors sought to establish that he was a Nazi sympathizer. In order to do this, they reviewed his browser history, searched his home, and interviewed several witnesses. The browser searches revealed that he had downloaded photos of Nazi soldiers. He also had several books at home depicting the experiences of Nazi soldiers on the Eastern Front during World War II. Witnesses, including Mr. Kort’s brother, testified to his interest in Nazi ideology and his enmity towards Russia.

With regard to the cartoon, a court-appointed expert concluded that the image contained a set of derogatory psychological and linguistic signs targeting non-ethnic Russians.

On the basis of these expert and witness testimonies, the court held that Mr. Kort incited national hatred against non-ethnic Russians by publishing the image in question and sentenced him to one year in a penal colony.

His sentence was subsequently reduced to a fine of 200,000 rubles (about $3,400) on appeal.


Decision Direction

Quick Info

Decision Direction indicates whether the decision expands or contracts expression based on an analysis of the case.

Contracts Expression

This case contracts freedom of expression. Even though the defendant in this case supported Nazism, his prison sentence was a disproportionate measure when balanced against the harm caused by his expression. He had shared a single image on his personal social media page that did not lead to any violence. Furthermore, he had no intention to share the image publicly and, therefore, could not have intended to incite others to violence or hatred.

Global Perspective

Quick Info

Global Perspective demonstrates how the court’s decision was influenced by standards from one or many regions.

Table of Authorities

Case Significance

Quick Info

Case significance refers to how influential the case is and how its significance changes over time.

This case did not set a binding or persuasive precedent either within or outside its jurisdiction. The significance of this case is undetermined at this point in time.

Official Case Documents

Reports, Analysis, and News Articles:


Attachments:

Have comments?

Let us know if you notice errors or if the case analysis needs revision.

Send Feedback