R 181401Z FEB 09
FM AMCONSUL ST PETERSBURG
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 2716
INFO AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 
AMCONSUL ST PETERSBURG 
AMCONSUL VLADIVOSTOK 
AMCONSUL YEKATERINBURG

UNCLAS ST PETERSBURG 000022 
 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: RS PHUM PGOV
SUBJECT: ST. PETERSBURG HR OMBUDSMAN - NOT YOUR EVERYDAY OMBUDSMAN 
 
REF: ST. PETERSBURG 69 , ST. PETERSBURG 189 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  Summary.  In a February 10 meeting with the Consul 
General, the St. Petersburg Human Rights Ombudsman Igor 
Mikhaylov expounded on his interpretation of human rights and 
political views.  The discussion ranged over his view of the 
raid on Memorial's headquarters, migrant workers, the right of 
assembly, and the role individual rights should play versus the 
good of society.  Theoretically, the St. Petersburg Human Rights 
Ombudsman should play an important role in the protection of 
human rights.  In practice, however, Mikhaylov's views, goals, 
and priorities are not what one would expect from a Human Rights 
Ombudsman.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  Mikhaylov was talkative, self-congratulatory, and 
evidently proud of his achievements, enumerating his having 
learned, without any formal study, several foreign languages as 
well as his working with juvenile delinquents to teach them 
proper gun handling and shooting techniques. 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  Igor Mikhaylov was elected the St. Petersburg Human 
Rights Ombudsman in July 2007 by the St. Petersburg Legislative 
Assembly.  Unlike Federal Ombudsmen, the St. Petersburg 
Ombudsman has no mandate to request information on court trials 
on his own, but rather must typically only respond to complaints 
received from individuals or organizations.  His office receives 
about 30 written complaints per week, of which half are usually 
dismissed as irrelevant.  About 60 percent of the complaints are 
regarding abuses by the court system and police.  Most of the 
remaining 40 percent are regarding housing problems.  The St. 
Petersburg Ombudsman has 25 staff members in his office. 
 
============================= 
The Human Rights Ombudsman vs. The Human Rights NGO Community 
============================= 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  The St. Petersburg human rights community was 
strongly opposed to Mikhaylov's candidacy for the Ombudsman 
post, since during his terms as a Legislative Assembly Deputy he 
had been well known for his very strong support of governmental 
policies and his general disdain for accusations of violations 
of human rights.  Human Rights activists have continued to 
ignore Mikhaylov following his election, stating that 
cooperation with him is unproductive.  This unofficial policy 
has been most recently reconfirmed by the NGO Memorial's 
decision to not officially complain to him about their ongoing 
difficulties with the government since the raid on their St. 
Petersburg headquarters in December 2008. 
 
============================= 
Memorial:  A Troublemaking Organization Which Happened to Win 
its Court Case 
============================= 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  The Consul General thanked Ombudsman for his response 
to our letter expressing our concern over the raid on Memorial. 
Mikhaylov stated he had not yet received an official response 
from the St. Petersburg Ministry of Internal Affairs to his 
inquiry, but that he would forward it to the Consulate as soon 
as he gets it.  Unofficially, he believes, however, that 
although the search was done with procedural violations, it was 
a justified action because the ongoing Andreyev/Novy Petersburg 
case investigation at the time was at risk of losing important 
material evidence.  He said it was important to conduct the 
search as quickly as possible because Andreyev's case was one of 
national security, and that the investigation had to be done in 
order to prevent a catastrophe similar to that of September 11 
in the United States.  (Note:  This line is the same as was 
given by the Russian government to the European Court of Justice 
in response to Memorial's complaint).  Mikhaylov also stated the 
investigators had found what they were looking for.  He accepted 
that the court ruling which required all materials be returned 
to Memorial had to be obeyed, despite the ultimate legitimacy of 
the government's search and seizure.  The Ombudsman then assured 
us that Memorial has already received everything back.  We found 
this to be a confusing statement since our other sources have 
confirmed to us Memorial has not received anything back thus 
far.  Mikhaylov then opined that although the Prosecutor's 
Office is now appealing the case, it is unlikely to succeed 
because the court did rule that the investigators had violated 
the law when conducting the search.  Mikhaylov's opinion was 
that the Prosecutor's Office appealed the case only as a 
face-saving measure. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  Mikhaylov was in general critical of Memorial, 
stating that in his view it is wrong for an organization to be 
constantly dwelling on the past and making people feel guilty 
for things that happened in the past.  He stated that throughout 
Russian history there have been repressions, and that thus the 
communist repressions, including those committed under Stalin, 
needed to be understood within that context, and not 
specifically singled out for criticism. 
 
============================= 
Immigrants Can Be Emigrants, Too 
============================= 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  Official statistics have it that there are around 
200,000 immigrants living in St. Petersburg - the actual number 
is higher.  The Ombudsman expressed his concern about growing 
unemployment among migrants, which he stated will lead to more 
of them turning to crime.  He noted that over one quarter of all 
sexual crimes in Russia are committed by non-Russian citizens. 
He elaborated on the fact that Central Asian residents of the 
former Soviet republics had always been used in the Soviet Union 
as unskilled labor force, since they have no education nor 
aptitude for any other type of work, and that this situation has 
continued on into modern-day Russia,.  In anticipation of 
tensions caused by rising immigrant unemployment, the Ombudsman 
is working with the Red Cross on creating a legal support center 
wherein even non-Russian speakers will be able to receive free 
consultation services.  At the same time, Mikhaylov is 
cooperating with Muslim community leaders in order to form a 
center for migrant repatriation to their homelands on a 
voluntary basis. 
 
============================= 
People Have a the Right of Assembly, Where the Government Says 
They Do 
============================= 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  To our query regarding his views on the people's 
right to publically express their views, Mikhaylov responded 
with a hypothetical example.  He stated that demonstrations by a 
handful of unhappy people which blocked central city streets was 
unfair to, and could even be considered a violation of the 
rights of, other people who drive around the city doing their 
errands.  So, the demonstrations should be held in locations 
where their disruption of everyday life would be minimized.  The 
government, of course, is best placed to make decisions as to 
what would or would not be disruptive to the majority of the 
citizenry, and thus had the responsibility to control 
demonstrations run amok.  However, Mikhaylov did underscore that 
the right to protest needed to be protected, and that the best 
ultimate solution would be to designate five or so special sites 
in relatively central locations, wherein protests could proceed 
unhindered.  Unfortunately, he said, St. Petersburg cannot pass 
such a law designating appropriate spots, as that would violate 
federal legislation. 
 
============================= 
Individual Human Rights Violations:  OK if in Society's Interest 
============================= 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  Ombudsman Mikhaylov shared his views on the 
relationship between law enforcement and youth culture and 
minority groups by describing two recent incidents.  The first 
was the use of government pressure in November 2008 which 
prevented a gay and lesbian film festival, and the second was a 
February 7 raid on a youth music club.  In both cases, the 
Ombudsman explained, government and law enforcement had imposed 
limitations and reduced the freedom of a small number of 
individuals in order to defend the interests and safety of 
society at large.  In the first case, he stated gay activists 
did not need to have an entire week of film shows since all the 
films were publicly available anyway.  So, he said, having this 
festival was just an attempt by homosexuals to aggressively 
advertise their sexual viewpoint which is unacceptable to the 
general public.  In the second case, the law enforcement raid on 
the night club was justified because there was reason to suspect 
that many of the fans of the main music group were members of 
neo-Nazi organizations. 
 
¶10.  (SBU)  Comment.  Our meeting with Mikhaylov was reminiscent 
of the Soviet era, wherein responses to questions consisted of 
formulaic and almost canned answers.  We are sympathetic to the 
views of the local Human Rights community that it is difficult 
to deal with a man who believes one of the major ongoing human 
rights violations in the city is the inability of the people to 
have access to all the accumulated artworks of the Hermitage and 
who does not agree with Memorial's goal of fully exposing the 
repressions of the communist era.  We will continue to engage 
him, but do not expect any serious dialogue with him on real 
human rights issues.  We hope to be proven wrong. 
 
 
GWALTNEY