Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Chris Bryant (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 July 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Russia.


Russia

I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) not only on securing today’s debate, but on becoming the chair of the all-party group on Russia only yesterday. However, I must say that his speech is one of the most dangerous that I have heard since I became an MP, because, as I shall try to elucidate, he fails to understand or recognise fully the dangers of the human rights abuses in Russia. He makes a moral equivalence between extradition requests and proceedings in this country and those in Russia, which is a dangerous equivalence to make. He underestimates the direction in which Russia is going—in a way that will not only damage commercial interests in the medium and long-term for the people of Russia and this country, but lead to a dwindling of democracy in that country with the steady advance of a totalitarian regime. He might think that I am exaggerating, but we will see, in future years, who proves to be right. I agree completely with the hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Field) that Russia faced a particular difficulty after experiencing an enormous political convulsion such as this country has not had to live with for many centuries. In a tiny space of time, it has had to address the sense of national and personal pride that attaches to being Russian. We have talked about Russia today when we mean the Russian Federation. The concept of Russia that many Russians, or people in the former Soviet Union, grew up with has been completely dismantled and changed. We, as a country, our European allies and anyone who wants to work closely with the Russian Federation needs to be conscious that it is a great nation with an extraordinary cultural history. Few countries can match the talent of that country in so many different areas, such as culturally, with Tchaikovsky, Pushkin and Rublyov. Few countries can match its enormous mineral and physical resources, its geographical dispersal or its historical complexity, which is woven into many different understandings of the relationships of religion to the state and of the individual to society. Of course, we must walk with trepidation when we talk about our relationship with Russia, because, all too often, it is easy for us—the hon. Member for The Wrekin might accuse me of falling into my own trap—to face up the Russian Federation in a way that makes it feel that we do not respect it. That would be dangerous. However, it is important to say that the level of human rights abuses in Russia today is so significant that no country that respects human rights and believes in the foundation of the principle of law can engage in an open relationship with the Russian Federation without being explicit about the problems there. In our society, we believe in the fundamental right of non-governmental organisations to operate and to criticise the Government, the institutions of society and the state in whatever way they want. The situation for NGOs in the Russian Federation is getting worse year by year. Only recently, political parties have faced more difficult actions involving the courts that have made it much more difficult for people to enjoy their full political freedoms. Life was made more difficult for NGOs in Russia in April of last year, when President Putin signed into law a Bill demanding that they register their activities and funding sources with the federal registration service or risk facing closure. Immediately afterwards, there was a series of attacks on a large number of NGOs in Russia, which made many organisations close down. There is also a problem with media oppression, which has been adverted to by a few Members. It is not only the death of Anna Politkovskaya that has worried many people in the west. According to the International Federation of Journalists, more than 80 journalists have been murdered because of their work in Russia since 1993, and there has not been a single prosecution in any of those cases. The organisation says that of 289 journalists killed in Russia in the past 14 years,"““more than 80 of the deaths resulted from the work the journalists were doing directly””." The Russian state now has a virtual—indeed, actual—monopoly over the entire national television network, which means that there is no opportunity for political opponents of the regime to have a fair opportunity when it comes to election time. Several television channels have been deprived of their licences by the Government, and several have been taken off air, so it is, perhaps, not surprising that President Putin has said:"““We have never had freedom of speech in Russia, so I do not understand what can be violated””."


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
463 c257-8WH 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Climate change Democracy Extradition Human rights Foreign relations Trade Russia Assassination Lugovoi, Andrei Litvinenko, Alexander
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk