The Meshchansky Court of Moscow fined the online cinema Premier 4 million rubles under the article on the dissemination of information among minors about “non-traditional sexual relations” (Article 6.21.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation). The films "Perfect Strangers" and "The Barber of England" served as an occasion.
According to TASS, the protocol states that the online cinema did not mark these films as “18+”. There was a 16+ restriction, but all subscribers had access to the feeds. The case file also states that the said films contain scenes “demonstrating and describing homosexual relationships”.
According to Mediazona, a representative of the cinema, Vladislav Veremeytsev, said that the company does not admit guilt. According to him, after new articles about “propaganda of non-traditional relationships” appeared in the Code of Administrative Offenses, the service asked the copyright holders to revise the age marking of films, but received no answer. In addition, Premier changed the labeling of "Ideal Strangers" and "English Barber" to "18+" immediately after he received a claim from Roskomnadzor, even before the protocol was drawn up.
There are currently two articles in the Russian Code of Administrative Offenses that refer to “propaganda” or “informing” about LGBT people:
- article 6.21 “Propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations and (or) preferences, gender reassignment”, where “propaganda” means “commitment of public actions aimed at the formation of non-traditional sexual attitudes”; part 2 deals with the same acts “committed among minors”;
- article 6.21.2 “Dissemination to minors of information demonstrating non-traditional sexual relations and (or) preferences or capable of causing minors to desire to change their sex”: here we are talking about any information “demonstrating non-traditional sexual relations”, even if it cannot be interpreted as “ propaganda."
As lawyer and human rights activist Maxim Olenichev told The Insider, the law on “LGBT propaganda” is formulated in such a way that it can be applied arbitrarily, and people cannot understand in practice what the prohibitions are, for violation of which they can be held accountable.
“If the content is subject to informing, then in order for online services not to be held administratively liable [under Art. 6.21.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses], at least two conditions must be met: the “18+” marking and the preliminary plate before the user enters the site “Are you 18 years old?”. When answering the question "No 18 years old", access to the site should not be granted. If these conditions are met, then it is impossible to attract under the mentioned article.
When distributing information that the state qualifies as “gay propaganda”, compliance with the conditions (“18+” and a preliminary plate) does not exempt from administrative liability under Art. 6.21 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.
What is the difference between "gay propaganda" and "informing"? The law does not provide an answer to this question. It can only be given by a court when considering a specific case of an administrative offense.”
In 2014, the Russian Constitutional Court issued a ruling stating that propaganda is the active imposition of ideas and values. As Olenichev notes, “when considering cases, Russian courts, as a rule, do not go into such details”:
“In 2017, the ECtHR ruled that the Russian law on ‘gay propaganda’ violated human rights. The construct “gay propaganda” itself is artificial, so there are many questions about the application of such norms of the law in practice. There is no such propaganda in reality.”
Earlier today, the court fined the Russian Reportage film company 500,000 rubles under the article on “propaganda” of LGBT people among minors (part 2 of article 6.21 of the Code of Administrative Offenses). The occasion was the series "Made in Italy", shown by the TV channel Kinoliving .
