The last word of the defendant Igor Gusev in Krasnoyarsk

 RUSSIA 

The last word of the defendant Igor Gusev in Krasnoyarsk

November 17, 2022

Krasnoyarsk Territory

From the courtroom

In his last word, the believer thoroughly analyzed and refuted the arguments of the prosecution. "What is happening to me today is very similar to what happened to Jehovah's Witnesses in the USSR, who were later recognized as victims of political repression," concluded Igor Gusev.

Transcript of the court session in the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of Krasnoyarsk dated 11/17/2022 in case 1-369/2022 on charges of Gusev Igor Vladimirovich of committing a crime under Part 1 of Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Gusev Igor Vladimirovich:

Your Honor, I want to thank you for listening to me attentively, helping me when I did not understand something in legal terms, and being patient when I referred to the Holy Scriptures in my explanations (because I am trying to build my life on the principles contained in this Scripture).

I would like to thank the public prosecutor, who monitors the observance of the rule of law and ensures that each crime is given an appropriate assessment.

I also want to thank my lawyer, who had a difficult task on her shoulders, because she knew nothing about Jehovah's Witnesses, their faith, and what kind of people they were. She made a sincere effort to understand who we are. I would like to thank my dear colleagues and friends who came and supported me both at the meeting and outside the court during this difficult time for me.

I would like to thank my dear wife, who, although she could not attend the meeting, is deeply worried about me.

Your Honor, dear participants in the trial, I would like to go over the indictment.

"The organization and the MRO, by virtue of paragraphs 1 of Article 6, paragraph 1 of Article 8 of Federal Law No. 125 of 09/26/1997 "On Freedom of Conscience and on Religious Associations", were religious associations of all persons from among the followers of the religious teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses living in the territory of the Russian Federation and the Krasnoyarsk Territory, respectively" (p. 17, paragraph 3).

Firstly, among those who attend meetings of the Jehovah's Witness meeting, there are minor children, including baptized ones. At the same time, minors cannot be members of the MRO (Charter, clause 1.1).

Secondly, the organization and the MRO, according to the conclusion of the investigation, supervise and manage ordinary members. I have already pointed out the illogicality of the statement that ordinary members govern themselves. Then, according to the investigation, all residents of the Krasnoyarsk Territory are members of the Legislative Assembly and governors of the Krasnoyarsk Territory. And since we live on the territory of the Russian Federation, we are all members of the Russian government, presidents, but this is not the case.

Thirdly, since Jehovah's Witnesses live on planet Earth, they are part of the international terrestrial part of the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses, but they are not members of the Governing Council, and the Supreme Court did not recognize this organization as extremist. So, as a resident of planet Earth, I am not an extremist.

"Gusev I. V. was an elder of a local religious group by canonical subordination" (p. 17, paragraph 5).

The investigation did not provide any confirmation of this, and during the interrogation of a secret witness, this information was refuted. Kuzmin pointed out that there were four elders, and my last name did not sound among the names mentioned.

According to the secret witness, the appointment of elders is carried out under the supervision of the "Management Center of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia." The preliminary investigation, having appointed me an elder, in fact, assumed the functions of this banned organization, thereby resuming its activities, although it accuses me of this. In addition, a new term is emerging — a local religious group. Among the things listed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, there is no such structure.

"...Speaking out in favor of religious hatred, which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence" (p. 18, paragraph 4).

Firstly, we examined the memoranda and watched the video, and there was no speech in favor of religious hatred, incitement to hostility, discrimination and violence. That is, this statement is unfounded.

Secondly, it contradicts the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses, as we learn to love even those who curse us (Luke 6:27, 28).

"Carried out activities to coordinate the preaching activities of Jehovah's Witnesses professing religion in order for them to exercise their right to profess faith ... in order to carry out their religious activities" (p. 18, paragraph 1).

The author says that Jehovah's Witnesses exercise their right to profess faith, and calls their activities religious, not extremist. The exercise by citizens of their constitutional rights is not a crime. In addition, the case file does not confirm that I coordinated the preaching activities.

"Realizing his criminal intent, Gusev I. V. if there was a real opportunity, most likely, he could stop illegal activities, realizing that by his actions he undermines the foundations of the constitutional order and the security of the state, anticipating the onset of socially dangerous consequences in the form of violations of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a person and a citizen, depending on his religious affiliation and attitude to religion, and wishing this, acting from extremist motives, expressed in the promotion of the benefits of followers of this religious teaching, a call to refuse medical intervention, including for emergency indications to eliminate the threat to human life, non-acceptance of state bodies" (p. 19, paragraph 1.).

Your Honor, in my opinion, the investigator himself uses the method that he attributes to me. The phrases "undermines the foundations of the constitutional order", "undermines the security of the state", "the onset of socially dangerous consequences" are aimed at manipulating the participants in the process in order to expose me as a dangerous criminal.

First, "realizing his criminal intent." Criminal intent and Jehovah's Witnesses are incompatible with each other. Well, a criminal cannot be a friend of Jehovah, because "light has nothing in common with darkness."

Secondly, the phrase "a call to refuse medical intervention" may suggest that I am calling someone to something. Let me remind you that the majority of people who come to the meetings are people who know the teachings of this religion very well, share them and believe them, and who have voluntarily devoted their lives to the service of Jehovah God. Therefore, they do not need to be called upon to do anything, just as you, dear participants in the process, should not be called upon to fulfill your professional duties.

Thirdly, "a call for the rejection of medical intervention, including ...". The phrase "including" may suggest that Jehovah's Witnesses refuse not only blood transfusions. That is, it can be misleading. Many Jehovah's Witnesses work and, in case of illness, go to the polyclinic for treatment and sick leave. Many people refuse [blood transfusion] because they consider such medical care dangerous (due to diseases such as hepatitis, HIV, etc.). But when Jehovah's Witnesses reject it for religious reasons, for some reason it begins to pose a threat to the security of the state and the constitutional order. […]

Fourth, "rejection of government agencies." There are many pensioners among Jehovah's Witnesses, and my retirement is not far off. Why should I give up my pension? Besides, my place of work refutes this statement.

It also contradicts what is written in Romans 13:1: "Every person must obey the highest authorities, because any authority is from God." Jehovah's Witnesses obey the authorities without any coercion, if the demands of the authorities do not contradict the laws of God. The decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation... does not prohibit people from professing their faith. Therefore, as the secret witness told me, I was definitely aware that worship services are not prohibited and I am not breaking any law.

Fifth, "propaganda of advantage". In the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses, I gain knowledge about what God approves of and what I need to avoid and avoid. And I try not only to gain knowledge, but also to apply it.

You, dear participants in the process, have a law degree. And in this building, Your Honor, you have an advantage over the other two participants in the process. But hardly any of you think that education gives you an advantage in the store, transport, theater or cinema. Knowledge alone does not give me any advantage.

Moreover, the Bible says that God Jehovah chose the weak and unwise to shame the strong and wise (First Letter to Corinthians 1:27). If I considered myself wiser than people of other religions, it turns out that I would not be among those whom Jehovah chose, but among those whom Jehovah would put to shame.

Another argument is related to the accusation of refusing to take up arms. Jehovah's Witnesses in the USSR were imprisoned for refusing to serve in the army. In Hitler's Germany, Jehovah's Witnesses were imprisoned in concentration camps and even executed some of them. Is it possible to say that people who preferred imprisonment and even death to killing people of another faith consider themselves superior to those who refuse to kill? Maybe, on the contrary, Jehovah's Witnesses value someone else's life above their own?

Sixth, "propaganda of the advantages of this religious teaching." Is there any other way, whether in religion, politics, or military operations? Has anyone ever heard of a religion whose adherents would say that their creeds are wrong? Has anyone heard any president admit that his state's policy is wrong? The preliminary investigation authorities and the prosecution are one hundred percent sure that I committed a crime — doesn't Mr. Prosecutor think that the truth is on his side? Does this confidence in his rightness make him an extremist? Of course not, just as I am not an extremist if I consider my faith to be correct.

Interrogation of a secret witness (p. 24, paragraph 1). The men were allegedly urged to refuse to serve in the army. Is refusing to serve in the army an extremist act in itself? No. The replacement of military service with civilian service is guaranteed by law.

The words from the Bible are written in huge letters on the wall of the UN building: "He will be the judge of nations and settle differences between many nations. They will turn their swords into plows and their spears into sickles. The nations will not go at each other with the sword and will no longer learn to fight" (Isaiah 2:4). And in front of the wall there is a sculpture of a man who is forging a sword into a plow. Although the UN calls for reforging weapons and not learning to fight, no one recognizes this organization as extremist ... At the same time, people who have just reforged their swords into agricultural tools, who value someone else's life more than their freedom and even their own lives, are called extremists. They are put in correctional institutions… And what do they want to fix in a person who refuses to kill people for anything?

Jehovah's Witnesses live in 239 countries and territories, and they are not at war with each other or with people of other faiths. That is, we are proving that it is possible to live peacefully.

Your Honor, I want to draw attention to what the examination is based on. "Physical violence is prohibited within the framework of the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses, as stated throughout the history of the organization by its critics..." (p. 31, paragraph 2). The expert is based on the opinion of people who are initially critical. What are they criticizing?

First, they say that Jehovah's Witnesses have manipulative methods of preaching. Jehovah's Witnesses preach the way Jesus Christ taught his disciples to preach. In Matthew 10:11, he said: "In whatever city or village you come, look for those who are worthy of your message." Notice, Your Honor, Jesus did not say "grab everyone in a row," but said "find the worthy ones." This is consistent with other words recorded in John 6:44: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him to me." In this way, people are attracted to God himself and, therefore, neither I nor other Jehovah's Witnesses need any manipulative methods of preaching.

Secondly, "exile from it." Not exactly exile, or rather, not exile at all. We are talking about a person who has committed a grave sin and does not want to repent. This is compared to a serious illness, only in a spiritual sense. To prevent others from becoming "infected", the "patient" is isolated until he is completely cured. It's like quarantine in the army, where dysentery broke out in some unit. They try to isolate patients from other military personnel. In this case, it is ridiculous to consider quarantine as a punishment, rather, it is a necessary measure to protect personnel.

Here I stand before you alive and well, and yet I myself was deprived of communication around 1997. Moreover, I asked for it myself, because I was exactly aware of the need for such an action. It took quite a long time, and I was reinstated in 2010.

Thirdly, it "does not allow independent thinking of the leadership style." Your Honor, there are many organizations where this particular leadership style is used, for example, where people are divided by ranks and positions, namely the army, police, etc. And no one sees anything wrong with it. Jehovah's Witnesses do not have titles and positions, in addition, we are not taught numerous laws, but are taught to reflect on what principles can be used. For example: the law "do not kill", and the principles "love your neighbor as yourself" and "whatever you want to be treated, do it yourself." In addition, the Bible says that every person will give an account to God for himself. Thus, if someone were to tell me what to do and what not to do, then the responsibility would fall on the one who gave me this instruction. And this contradicts the Word of God.

In 2021, the Governing Body issued 10 appeals to all Jehovah's Witnesses across the earth about why it is worth getting vaccinated. In each appeal it was said that everyone decides for himself whether he will be vaccinated or not. If the leadership style did not allow for independent thinking, then there would be only one video, and it would contain a categorical order to vaccinate everyone as soon as possible.

"Gusev I. V. is a follower of the Jehovah's Witnesses religion, therefore he has the right to study the Bible and other literature of this religious teaching, including together with other followers" (p. 34, paragraph 3).

Your Honor, the case file confirms that those gathered are studying the Bible and literature of "this religious teaching." And therefore, according to the investigator, they are doing what they have the right to do. If they have the right to do so, then they are not violating anything, including me. If I'm not violating anything, then why am I being judged?

"The right to freedom of religion cannot exclude criminal activity in the actions of Gusev I. V., since when exercising the right to freedom of religion, it is precisely about freedom of religion by citizens, albeit jointly with others, regardless of any organizations" (p. 34, paragraph 5).

How does the organization where I work (I am not a member of other organizations) affect religious freedom? Or is it a religious organization? Does an Orthodox priest who has been appointed to some position (dignity) cease to be a citizen and lose the right to freedom of religion? Maybe the governor or the prime minister, appointed to his post by the president, lose the right to freedom of religion? Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the investigator unwittingly deprived me of my civil rights.

"I renounce faith in Jehovah God," the FSB investigator suggested that I make such a statement in writing. He said that then nothing would threaten me, in the case of Stupnikov A. G. I would go as a witness, otherwise I would face trial and time.

It was at that moment that I realized that I was being tried not for a crime, but for believing in Jehovah God. I remembered how in Hitler's Germany, Jehovah's Witnesses who refused to fight were made similar offers. As in 1951, during Operation North, the same was offered to Jehovah's Witnesses in the Union republics such as Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus and the Baltic States. I was offered to renounce Jehovah, but Jesus, in the prayer known as "Our Father," calls him Father. I remembered the stigma of "children of enemies of the people", which was given to those who did not abandon their parents. And I also thought: does this young investigator really want to live in a country where people will abandon their parents, their children, and their Homeland at any moment? The investigator behaved as if my life was in his hands.

This was also the thought of a statesman in ancient times, whose name is known to many people today — even those who are far from the Bible. The procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, thought that the life of Jesus Christ depended on him and on his will. But Jesus thought otherwise, and time has shown that Pilate was wrong. Of course, he tried to save Jesus, but he was threatened with complaining to Caesar that he had freed a man who called himself king. But I didn't want to tell you about Caesar, but about the trial. This process was not accidental, it was prepared for a long time.

Jesus was almost constantly followed by the people, and wherever he spoke to people, there were Pharisees everywhere. They were always waiting for Jesus to say or do something that would compromise him. And sometimes they even asked him tricky questions. They were looking for someone who would betray Jesus, and one night they came to arrest him. So, there were also witnesses at that trial who testified. For example, they said that Jesus encouraged them to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days. It cannot be said that this is a lie, except for the word "prompted". In fact, Jesus was saying that he would be killed, that is, his life would be destroyed, and on the third day he would rise again. Thus the words of Jesus were distorted, and the truth became a lie. […]

I would like to point out, dear court, that religious truth has become the decisive argument in making a verdict. Thus Jesus was condemned for his faith. But when they brought him to Pilate, they accused him of something completely different: "he leads the people astray, forbids paying taxes, declared himself king." Why has the charge changed? Because Pilate would not have executed a man because his faith was different from the faith of the Pharisees. Jesus openly warned his disciples that a disciple was no bigger than his teacher, and if Jesus was persecuted, then his disciples would also be persecuted. They will be given to the courts, even killed, thinking that in this way they are performing a sacred service to God.

In the Acts of the Apostles, chapter 24, describes another trial of a man who was originally an opponent of Christ, but later became an apostle. We are talking about the Apostle Paul, who wrote many letters that were included in the Holy Scriptures. What was he accused of?

"We believe that this man is worse than any infection, the instigator among the Jews throughout the earth and the leader of the sect of the Nazarenes" (Acts 24:5). Today, they would say, "an extremist, encourages people to refuse to serve in the army, blood transfusion, submission to the authorities, poses a threat to the constitutional order and the state, elder."

"Besides, [Paul] tried to desecrate the temple." Today they would say: "incites religious strife, offends the feelings of believers" (verse 6). Would any of the Christians today believe in all this? Unlikely. And the fact that his letters were included in the Holy Scriptures indicates that God approved of Paul. Which means the accusations were false. And who accused him? "Five days later, the high priest Ananias came along with several elders" (verse 1). Please note that Paul was slandered in the presence of someone who considered himself a servant of God! "By questioning him, you will be convinced of the validity of our accusations" (verse 8). Pavel's accusers claim that their accusations are justified.

What does Paul say to this? "You can make sure for yourself that about 12 days ago I came to worship in Jerusalem, and no one saw me arguing with anyone in the temple and inciting the crowd to riot in synagogues or the city. They cannot prove the accusations they are making against me" (verses 11-13).

Pavel denies the accusations against him and declares that there is no evidence of his guilt. And then in the next two verses he explains why the accusations are unfounded. "I have the same hope in God as they do —the hope that there will be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous. Therefore, I try to always have a clear conscience before God and people" (verses 15 and 16). That is, Paul says that everything he does is always consistent with his trained conscience, which means that he could not do anything against the law of God. Then why are these people of the same family and worshippers of the same God accusing Paul?

"I acknowledge that I serve the God of my ancestors in accordance with the teachings that are called sectarian, and I believe everything that is written in the law and in the books of the prophets" (verse 14). That's the thing! Paul lives according to a teaching that religious leaders do not like and which they call sectarian. This means that Paul is also being judged for his faith.

And what am I accused of, Your Honor? The fact that I don't transfuse blood, I don't learn how to kill and I don't kill, I don't participate in elections. But all this is done by Orthodox, Muslims, atheists, and no one puts them in jail for it. But when it comes to Jehovah's Witnesses, everyone says with one voice that this is a crime. That is, people don't like that I live by a Bible-trained conscience, which means that it's just about my faith, which is also considered sectarian.

They also claim that I tried to resume the activities of the banned MRO, and they did not even bother to specify which of the 495 organizations listed in the Supreme Court decision.

I am used to the fact that people of non-traditional faiths are considered narrow-minded people. Your Honor, I ask myself the question: "Why resume the activities of the MRO? I will not be able to register the MRO, because it is prohibited. I will not be allowed to buy land for the construction of the Kingdom Hall anyway, because the Krasnoyarsk MRO is prohibited. I will not be able to build a Kingdom Hall or rent a room. I won't be able to pay any taxes. And what can I do by resuming the MRO? The answer is to go to jail. But the psychiatrist in his examination did not recognize me as crazy.

There is a phrase in the accusation: "The State guarantees equality of human and civil rights and freedoms regardless of attitude to religion ... any form of restriction of citizens' rights on the basis of religious affiliation is prohibited."

Your Honor, participants in the trial, there are no facts in the television news or on the Internet that Orthodox, Catholics, Muslims or Jews would be tried for their faith, but more than 500 people have already been convicted of Jehovah's Witnesses. That is, restrictions on the basis of religious affiliation are still visible.

We live in a country with a very rich history, both good and bad. Jehovah's Witnesses were exiled, imprisoned, and considered American spies. But in 1991, the state recognized Jehovah's Witnesses as victims of political repression. That is, what was done to believers was repression. People were given certificates of rehabilitation, but, apparently, history is not the most favorite subject in our country. And after 26 years, everything returned to normal.

Your Honor, I hope I've managed to show that the only reason I'm standing here is my faith in Jehovah God!

Your Honor, I believe that the accusation... is not supported by any memorandum, video materials, or any other case materials.

A secret witness has refuted the investigator's claim that I am an elder. The case file shows that I am only reading the article for study, and not expressing my thoughts. All participants of the meeting have a personal copy of the article in electronic form. Which article is being studied around the world this week is indicated immediately before the article itself in the journal. Also, turning on the computer is not an organizational action. So part 1 of Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not apply to my actions in any way, since I did not organize anything.

In addition, there was no confirmation of anything extremist in the case file. The fact that the case file mentions refusal to vote, blood transfusion and military service, it is not a crime and certainly does not contain any signs of extremism.

Thus, the 2nd part of Article 282.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has nothing to do with my actions, since there are no signs of extremism in my actions.

In addition, what is happening to me today is very similar to what happened to Jehovah's Witnesses in the USSR, who were later recognized as victims of political repression. Thus, with a high degree of confidence, I can consider what is happening to me as repression. And not on the part of the state, but on the part of the preliminary investigation authorities. I firmly believe that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation could not make an unconstitutional decision and in its decision took into account Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Your Honor, I am sure that in your decision you will also take into account Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which gives me the right to worship Jehovah after 04/20/2017. I ask you to excuse me.

Summary of the case

Region:

Krasnoyarsk Territory

Locality:

Krasnoyarsk

What is suspected:

According to the investigation, "he organized religious performances and worship services"

Criminal case number:

12202040002000017

Case initiated:

February 17, 2022

Current stage of the case:

The verdict has entered into force

Investigates:

SO for the Railway district of Krasnoyarsk, the GSU of the IC of Russia for the Krasnoyarsk Territory and the Republic of Khakassia

Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation:

282.2 (1)

Case number in court:

1-369/2022

Court of first instance:

Zheleznodorozhny District Court of Krasnoyarsk

Judge of the Court of first instance:

Alexander Aksyutenko