This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/01/world/europe/aleksei-navalny.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Putin Critic Sentenced to House Arrest Putin Critic Sentenced to House Arrest
(about 3 hours later)
MOSCOW — Aleksei A. Navalny, Russia’s leading opposition figure, was placed under house arrest on Friday and ordered not to use the Internet or telephone for two months, thus removing President Vladimir V. Putin’s fiercest critic from public life.MOSCOW — Aleksei A. Navalny, Russia’s leading opposition figure, was placed under house arrest on Friday and ordered not to use the Internet or telephone for two months, thus removing President Vladimir V. Putin’s fiercest critic from public life.
The sentence capped a week in which the Russian authorities showed that they were willing to disrupt demonstrations, detain large numbers of people and hand down tough sentences to curtail internal dissent after the conclusion of the Sochi Winter Olympics on Sunday. In his verdict, Judge Artur Karpov of Basmany Court in Moscow ruled that Mr. Navalny had violated the terms of a travel ban from a pending criminal case accusing him of defrauding a local branch of the cosmetics producer Yves Rocher of more than $500,000.
Judge Artur Karpov at the Basmany Court in Moscow ruled that Mr. Navalny had violated the terms of a travel ban from a pending criminal case over the defrauding of a local branch of the cosmetics producer Yves Rocher. The stiff restrictions in what is widely seen as a politically charged prosecution will effectively muzzle Mr. Navalny, the blogger-cum-politician who has used social media to trumpet mass demonstrations against the Kremlin and release damning profiles of corrupt practices in government bids, the most recent asserting that billions of dollars were stolen in the preparations for the Sochi Olympics.
“It’s a travel ban,” Judge Karpov told Mr. Navalny in a packed courtroom. “It meant you couldn’t go where you were not given express permission.” “Their only goal is to stop my political activities,” Mr. Navalny told Judge Karpov in front of a packed courtroom. “They want to stop me from coordinating our anticorruption investigations.”
The fraud case is one of several criminal prosecutions brought against Mr. Navalny by Russian prosecutors that seem politically motivated and largely trumped-up to give the authorities ways to curtail his movements and communication and to muzzle his criticism of Mr. Putin. The ruling, which also prohibits Mr. Navalny from speaking with the news media or accepting visitors other than close family members, capped a week in which the Russian authorities showed a renewed will to disrupt demonstrations, detain large numbers of people and hand down tough sentences to curtail internal dissent since the conclusion of the Winter Games on Sunday.
Mr. Navalny was convicted in July in an embezzlement case widely viewed as groundless, and sentenced to five years in prison. He was led out of the courtroom in Kirov, a regional capital, in handcuffs, only to be freed the next day on appeal and allowed to run for mayor of Moscow. At the time, his candidacy seemed to suit the Kremlin’s political goals by helping to portray the election as a genuine and hard-fought victory by the incumbent, Sergei S. Sobyanin, an ally of Mr. Putin. In the months before the Games, Mr. Putin gave amnesty to several of Russia’s most prominent prisoners, including a former oligarch, Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky, and two members of the punk protest group Pussy Riot, in what was seen as a nod to international criticism of their prosecutions. With the Games now over, the Kremlin has taken its most decisive step yet to silence Mr. Navalny as it continues to dampen the mood of protest that erupted two years ago.
Prosecutors requested house arrest after Mr. Navalny was convicted of resisting arrest on Tuesday, a day after he was detained at a rally in support of seven political activists who were sentenced to up to four years in prison on Monday for their part in a 2012 anti-Putin rally that evolved into clashes between demonstrators and the police. “It is easy to see that with the Olympics over, there’s no need to put up a kind face for anyone anymore,” Sergei Nikitin, the head of the Russian branch of Amnesty International, said in a telephone interview on Friday. “We are all witnesses to Russia’s growing pressure on any kind of independent opinion.”
Prosecutors on Friday accused Mr. Navalny of disturbing public order and of traveling outside the city limits. On Monday, a judge handed down sentences of two to four years in prison camps for seven activists detained during a 2012 anti-Putin rally that deteriorated into clashes between demonstrators and police officers, a case that Mr. Nikitin called “a parody of the administration of justice.” In a rally that followed, the police detained more than 400 peaceful protesters, including Mr. Navalny, who was subsequently convicted of resisting arrest and sentenced to seven days in jail.
Mr. Navalny has called the charges against him politically motivated. He is already serving a five-year probationary sentence for embezzlement in another case. The fraud case that Judge Karpov ruled on Friday is one of several criminal prosecutions brought against Mr. Navalny that seem politically motivated and largely trumped-up to give the authorities ways to curtail his movements and communication and to silence his criticism of Mr. Putin.
“Their only goal is to stop my political activities,” said Mr. Navalny, standing in the court in boots without laces, which were removed because he is serving a seven-day jail sentence for resisting the police at the rally on Monday. “They want to stop me from coordinating our anticorruption projects.” Prosecutors requested house arrest after Mr. Navalny was detained at Monday’s rally, claiming that he was disrupting public order at the demonstration and that he had traveled to the suburbs of Moscow in early January.
Jocular and irreverent, he railed against prosecutors during the trial, calling the terms of his travel ban “absurd.” “It’s a travel ban,” Judge Karpov told Mr. Navalny, who stood in boots without laces, which had removed because he has been held in jail since Monday. “It meant you couldn’t go where you were not given express permission.”
He also demanded that the judge allow him to use electronic communications through which he runs popular blogs and a Twitter account, as well as his anticorruption organization. Mr. Navalny has often skirted on the edge of prison, and his fate has been seen as a barometer of state pressure on the opposition in Russia.
Mr. Navalny was convicted in July in a separate embezzlement case and sentenced to five years in prison. He was freed the next day on appeal and allowed to run for mayor of Moscow. At the time, his candidacy seemed to suit the Kremlin’s political goals by helping to portray the election as a genuine and hard-fought victory by the incumbent, Sergei S. Sobyanin, an ally of Mr. Putin’s.
A State Department report released Friday criticized Russia for Mr. Navalny’s prosecution, citing it as one where “officials denied due process in politically motivated cases initiated by the Investigative Committee,” the law enforcement body that asked that Mr. Navalny be placed under house arrest.
Anna Veduta, Mr. Navalny’s aide, said outside the courthouse that Mr. Navalny’s anticorruption organization had divided his responsibilities and social media accounts and would continue working, although his colleagues were barred from communicating with him.
Jocular and irreverent, Mr. Navalny railed against prosecutors during the nearly two-hour trial, calling the terms of his travel ban “absurd.” A technophile who is rarely without an iPhone, he requested a computer from Ms. Veduta, saying “it may be my last hours” to use the Internet.
“I have a fairly popular blog,” Mr. Navalny told the court during oral arguments. “Two million people read it a month.”
He added, “A ban on my use of the Internet is a move to prevent me from publishing information about corruption.”