Radio France Internationale, June 10, 2013
Elena Servettaz
The president of the Institute of Modern Russia, Pavel Khodorkovsky, son of the best-known Russian political prisoner Mikhail Khodorkovsky, gave an exclusive interview to RFI on the eve of his father's birthday, in which he talked about the possibility of a third case being brought against his father, the degeneration of the Russian judicial system, and why he thinks that human rights issues should be raised at the European level.
RFI: How productive are meetings with European lawmakers in the framework of seminars on Russian political prisoners?
Pavel Khodorkovsky: I am glad that the ALDE [Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe] Group organized these hearings on the issue of political prisoners in Russia. Over the last few years, especially after the beginning of Putin’s third presidential term, these problems have worsened, and the number of Russian political prisoners now exceeds all conceivable limits and is approaching the Soviet level.
RFI: There is an interesting coincidence: the “Bolotnaya case” trial is about to start, Mikhail Khodorkovsky is turning 50 in June, and he has already spent the last ten years in prison. Maria Alekhina celebrated her 25th birthday at a prison colony [on June 6]. Everybody is talking about this in Brussels.
PK: I consider events such as today’s conference primarily as an opportunity to convey information, both actual and emotional, to people who either make decisions themselves or influence the decision-making process. I am talking about members of the European Parliament and those who work with them here in Brussels.
In my opinion, the opportunity to obtain first-hand information will increase awareness of what is going on—unfortunately not only in Russia, but in other countries as well—and will promote the priority of these problems at the decision-making stage.
Why do I personally think that such briefings can influence the adoption of specific decisions or laws? The reason is that at least 47 [EU] lawmakers have already declared officially that they would veto simplification of the visa regime [with Russia] unless this process is accompanied by the adoption of a law similar to the U.S. Magnitsky Act. This is a very good sign of movement in the right direction. This is also a good way not to adopt sanctions against a country as a whole, but to instead take specific measures that will make it clear to the Russian bureaucracy that neither the violation of human rights nor corrupt dealings will go unpunished, even if there is no rule of law in Russia.
RFI: How will you congratulate your father on his 50th birthday?
PK: Our family got lucky: we have a visit scheduled for the day after my father’s birthday. My brothers, my sister, and my father’s wife will have an opportunity to wish him a happy birthday right after the 26th. My wife, my daughter, and I are going to send him a handmade greeting card and, as we have done before, we will invite his friends living both in Russia and abroad to put several cards in one parcel. It takes some time, but these cards do reach their destination.
RFI: How do you communicate? By mail?
PK: Yes, we correspond by regular mail, as much as this is possible. We can also talk on a regular phone for five to ten minutes at a time once every two to three weeks.
RFI: How realistic is it for the prisoners’ families to receive reliable information? To what extent can prisoners communicate it? I understand, of course, that Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s case is a special one, but maybe you know something about the situation in general, about other cases?
PK: There has always been pressure—both in the Krasnokamensk prison colony, and in Chita and Moscow prisons. Of course there is always the danger that any information from my conversations with my father will be used against the prisoner. I can say, however, that after ten years, my father and I talk on the phone about pretty much everything—simply because ten years is such a long time to be in captivity that it would be hard for someone to do more to him, take something else from him, somehow use those tiny bits of information that we communicate to each other to make his situation in prison even worse.
Too much has been done to prevent him from seeing his younger children grow up, from seeing his granddaughter—my daughter, from engaging in the activities, both charitable and public, that he started prior to his arrest. Those activities would undoubtedly have done much more good for our country than his ten-year incarceration, during which he has been making plastic folders that are later sold in office supplies stores. It would be rather hard to do something more to him.
RFI: Your father has become a symbol of the fight for dignity both in Russia and in the European Union. Politicians as well as journalists are constantly discussing this. But none of them dares to guess when Mikhail Khodorkovsky will be released …
PK: Our family is waiting for next October—October 2014. However, our hopes have been dashed on many occasions already. I realize that a third [criminal] case is possible, and that pressure may be placed on the judiciary to keep my father in jail even after October 2014.
What do I hope for? First of all, I hope that there are more and more honest and sincere people in our country, that our country has come a long way over the past few years, especially in terms of the development of civil society since 2011. What we have seen over the past eighteen to twenty-four months would have seemed completely unrealistic in 2009 or 2010. I think that the government’s opportunities to intimidate its citizens are decreasing.
The social contract does not seem to be working anymore; people are tired of having one leader for the past 12 years, and society is no longer willing, in the medium-term, to tolerate continuous violations of the law. Whatever the Investigative Committee, the Prosecutor’s Office, the courts, and others are doing, they will not be able to stop the process of Russia’s transformation into a normal, secure and comfortable country. These changes are only a matter of time; it is only regrettable that, in terms of a human life, there is less and less of this time remaining.
I would, of course, like to believe that we will see my father free in October 2014. As you know, the Supreme Court recently announced that on August 6 it may review the decision on the length of [my father’s] prison term, and, of course, all of my family would like to hope for the best. For us, every month, every week, and every day is important.
RFI: Is what happened to Sergei Guriev an indication that Mikhail Khodorkovsky may not see “October 2014” for several more years?
PK: It is possible that the pressure being applied on the Russian expert community in general, and on Sergei Guriev in particular, may be an indication of a third case against my father being prepared. Suggestions that my father tried to influence the experts in some way are absurd, since the expertise was carried out after my father’s sentence went into effect. Also, one should not forget that all the experts who took part in the review are professionals, who are known both in Russia and abroad.
They gave their expert opinions at the request of the Russian Presidential Human Rights Council. As I see it, the key issue here is that their report provided the basis for many public and political discussions, in which the opinions of this group of experts were used to demonstrate the extent of the degradation of the Russian legal system.
In other words, the authorities did not like the conclusions of this report. Thus, in keeping with Russian tradition, in order to force the experts to recant their opinions, the authorities are trying to prove that someone influenced them.
RFI: The last question. There has been a lot of speculation about what your father is going to do when he is released. Have you discussed this?
PK: We rarely raise this subject; we prefer not to make plans for the future until the future becomes reality. I think, however, that, having spent ten years in jail without agreeing to any deals with the authorities, my father sees his future connected with Russia. He has told me many times that he wants to be useful to his country. For my part, I think that remaining in Russia after his release may threaten his safety. I would like him—and I tell him this openly—not to endanger himself by staying in Russia, at least under the current Russian regime. However, we disagree considerably on this subject.
