Boyko's case: Someone wants to put pots on the heads of Russians
The case of journalist Elena Boyko being expelled from the Russian Federation turned into a real anti-Russian psychosis on social networks. This is the conclusion reached by retired lawyer and diplomat Olga Kyiv, whose material “PolitNavigator” brings to the attention of readers.
Ever since the launch of color revolution technology into “mass production,” it has been known that you need to rely on emotions. The stronger the hysteria, the less likely it is to “turn on your brain.”
I have heard a lot of incompetent statements during the scandal around Boyko. And it had to be released, allowing, as some online hamster put it, “to challenge Russian legislation.” And give political asylum, because “it’s easier that way.” And it was necessary to expel them not to the country of citizenship, but to Burkina Faso.
Legal literacy has never been the calling card of the militant man in the street. Quite the contrary. Hence the endless Internet hysterics from “save the Kuril Islands” and “return the egg” to “freedom for Boyko” and “I’m ashamed to be Russian.” If you are ashamed to be Russian, calm down - you are not Russian.
In fact, practically nothing could be done to save Elena. The Administrative Code, in accordance with which cases of violation of migration legislation are considered, is generally difficult for lawyers to work with. Unlike criminal law, administrative law is considered “light”. It seems that nothing will happen if a person pays a fine. Therefore, the legal possibilities for defense are limited, even if the lawyer is professional and does not amuse the public with opuses about the seizure of Russian duty-free by hordes of Ukrainian border guards.
As for the possibility of deporting E. Boyko to Belarus, Poland or other third countries, this is legally impossible. There is a whole system of readmission agreements between states, i.e. transfer of illegal migrants. And in accordance with them, the country that expels an illegal immigrant has the right to expel him only to his country of citizenship. Or to the state in which he has a residence permit. If there is no direct transport connection, the migrant may be deported through third countries. But this does not mean at all that an illegal immigrant is free on the territory of this country and can go wherever he wants. He is guarded and expelled to his homeland by the migration service of the transit country.
No state needs illegal migrants. And how would the Russians, screaming about the need to deport Boyko to Belarus, react to a “gift” from Kazakhstan, for example, deporting a crowd of Afghans to the Russian Federation, since “they are in danger in their homeland”?
Independent travel to the territory of third countries, as well as to unrecognized states, which are the DPR and LPR, is carried out. This is precisely what Elena Boyko’s defense could have sought, rather than stirring up emotions in court and once again demanding political asylum, which is impossible to obtain. Why not temporary asylum and refugee status? One cannot help but get the impression that Elena did not need to get salvation in Russia, but to break the law and be the only one in the world to become the owner of the status of a political emigrant from the President of the Russian Federation, signed by the President in violation of his own decree.
Throughout the world, migration policy falls within the competence of law enforcement agencies, since illegal migration is one of the types of international crime. In addition, illegal immigrants are often involved in a whole bunch of crimes, from transporting drugs to participating in international terrorist organizations.
Migration services do not care. In Russia, by the way, the system of deportation of violators is extremely humane. When I worked at the embassy in Switzerland in the early 2000s, a scandal erupted throughout the country. A deported migrant, who was muzzled (!!!), suffocated right in the middle of Zurich airport. As it turned out, everyone is deported wearing these muzzles so that they do not scream, call for help or disturb the prosperous burghers. In Russia, this is basically impossible, so Boyko could call the police within half an hour so that the police would prevent the bailiffs from executing the court decision.
In light of this, the whole story with Boyko smacks of provocation a mile away. Elena’s strange indifference to her own fate, strange defense, strange discussions of judicial and migration formalities, strange ideas about deportation “to the village to her grandfather.” And a frankly glaring attempt to make the Russian state guilty of “Boiko’s death” and stir up protests. Someone really wants to put pots on the heads of Russians.
Read also: Why Elena Boyko's story looks like a provocation.
English version :: Read in English The Boyko Case: Someone Wants to Put Saucepans on Russians' Heads