"…the
insult and humiliation of the Christian faith and inciting religious
hatred."
Yekaterina Samutsevich, Maria Alyokhina and Nadezhda
Tolokonnikova the 3 female members of Pussy Riot were each sentence to 2 years
in a penal colony for "the insult and humiliation of the Christian faith
and inciting religious hatred".
The sentencing Judge, Syrova, in her comments
additionally criticised the defendants for being feminists, though noting
"belonging to feminism in the Russian Federation is not a legal violation
or crime." Well that's lucky but...The point being publicly made is they are in addition to their
sentence to be admonished by the Laws and The State for holding feminist convictions.
Syrova included in this admonishment (rather than sentence) that the women were
not quite the full quid presumably because of their atheism, feminism and choice to protest. The prosecution had expert opinion prove the women had psychological disorders how else could they could have performed such an atrocious
act (presumably?).
What they've really be gaoled for in truth is sedition, but throw in to
perhaps gain public acceptance is the heinous crime of defaming religion and
inciting hate.
It is interesting that mockery or criticism of religion can be considered to defame and an incitement to
hate. The Russian Orthodox Church has come out in addition prior to the sentencing to openly accuse any church critics
of "militant atheism". To critique or simply mock the church
is militant and illegal. To jump about in colourful balaclava's beseeching the
Virgin Mary to get rid of Putin for Russia's sake is not ostentatious
and lurid socio-political protest it is militant and illegal - seditious. It is healthy for both a country and its people to take a
challenging hit in the moral and ethical guts - obviously for Putin and the
Russian Orthodox Church it is a step too far.
Who got hurt? No citizenry
were harmed, the odd music critic maybe, but no real harm came to any person or
animal though an uncomfortable (for some) message was conveyed bluntly,
honestly and openly. The sickening aspect for any outspoken critic is the clear message they'll
get little support from a complicit legal system should they be charged with
such crimes. Russian edifices of The Church, Government and Law are in a
closed tripartite of control and they are saying look out. The Law supports the
desires of its controller - Putin is watching and he has supporters.
Would Pussy Riot receive any better in Australia? A
quick look at our sedition laws and the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act
implemented here imply they might be in an equivalent pickle. See below.
What message does
this send?
Self-censor because anything you may say may cause upset or
worse amongst others. So, say nothing or say only positive things. You are therefore censored. If you
transgress you are breaking the law and will be charged accordingly and pursued
in the criminal or possibly civil courts. Advance Australia Fair!
Conduct likely to be considered racial or
religious vilification includes:
•
comments about the race or religion of a
person that could incite contempt or ridicule of, or hatred for, that person
•
publishing baseless allegations that a racial
or religious group engages in serious criminal activities
•
persistent and serious verbal or physical
abuse about the race or religion of another person
•
encouraging violence against people who belong
to a particular race or religion and the destruction of their property
•
promoting hatred of a racial or religious
group in flyers, stickers, posters, in a speech or publication, or through
websites or email.
•
It is also against the law to authorise or
assist someone to vilify others.
Current Law
Schedule 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Bill (No. 2) 2005,[5] passed by the Upper House on 6 December
2005, repealed Sections 24A to
24E of the Crimes Act (1914) and reintroduced them, along with several
new classes of offence, in a Division 80—Treason and sedition. Crimes in
this division now attract a maximum penalty of seven years' imprisonment.
Seditious Intention
The definition of "seditious intention" originally in Section
24A has become (as amended):
An intention to effect any of the following purposes:
(a) to bring the Sovereign
into hatred or contempt;
(b) to urge disaffection against the following:
(i) the Constitution;
(ii) the Government of
the Commonwealth;
(iii) either House of the Parliament;
(c) to urge another person to attempt, otherwise than by lawful means,
to procure a change to any matter established by law in the Commonwealth;
(d) to promote feelings of ill-will or hostility between different
groups so as to threaten the peace, order and good government of the
Commonwealth.
No comments:
Post a Comment