As you know, the head of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation announced that "a decision has been made to create a certain department to investigate crimes related to the rehabilitation of Nazism and the falsification of the history of the Fatherland".
With the rehabilitation of Nazism it is clear. In 2014, Article 354.1 "Rehabilitation of Nazism" was introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Although the law enforcement practice on it is far from unambiguous. For example, the Volgograd Regional Court in 2017 considered the case on the charge of the citizen A.A. Volkov. in the fact that he “posted on the Internet a graphic image desecrating the symbols of Russia's military glory, namely the graphic image of the sculpture“ Motherland Calls! ”, desecrated by applying a green dye to the front of the sculpture's head, as well as the surface palms of the outstretched left hand".
However, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in September 2018 returned the case “for a new trial in a different composition of the court”, indicating that “Volkov A.A. did not desecrate a material object”, but only posted a photo on a social network.
Nevertheless, in March 2019, the Volgograd Regional Court "in a different composition" found Volkov guilty of committing a crime under Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Rehabilitation of Nazism" and sentenced him to a fine of 200 thousand rubles.
In June 2019, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation approved the verdict, but released Volkov from punishment due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.
These are the difficulties and even ambiguities.
From the statement of the chairman of the Investigative Committee, it follows that the newly created unit will investigate not only cases "related to the rehabilitation of Nazism", but also with "falsification of the history of the Fatherland".
The question is what counts as "falsification of history".
For example, in the late winter of 1613, the Kostroma peasant Ivan Susanin was killed. It is a fact. According to the generally accepted official version, Ivan Susanin was tortured to death by the Poles-invaders, trying to find out where the young Tsar Mikhail Romanov, elected by the Zemsky Sobor, is, whom they intended to kill. But Susanin did not betray, did not show them the way to the Ipatiev Monastery, led them into impenetrable forests and swamps, for which he was martyred.
He became a national hero in both tsarist Russia and Soviet Russia. True, in the USSR the name of Glinka's opera “A Life for the Tsar” was changed to “Ivan Susanin”.
However, the analysis of events in a general and specific context, willingly or unwillingly, raises questions. The Poles were expelled from Moscow in November 1612. Naturally, they went west to Smolensk, which was then part of Poland. What did some group of Poles do 4 months later, in the far north, in the remote Kostroma forests? Where did they have a clear connection with Moscow, how did they find out that a Zemsky Sobor was held in Moscow and that Mikhail Romanov was elected tsar there?
The generally accepted official version was questioned by the most prominent historians of pre-revolutionary Russia.
N.I. Kostomarov (1817 - 1885) wrote: "It is only certain that this peasant was one of the countless victims killed by robbers who roamed Russia in the Time of Troubles ... Then the Cossacks wandered through the villages and burned and tortured the peasants."
Historian S.M. Soloviev (1820 - 1879) asserts: "Susanin was tortured not by the Poles or the Lithuanians, but by the Cossacks, or in general by their own, Russian robbers..."
At that time, Russia was literally overwhelmed with domestic robber bands of all stripes, primarily Cossack ones. Two years after the end of the Troubles, on September 1, 1614, addressing the clergy, boyars, Duma members and all ranks to all people at the Council, the tsar said: “Cossack thieves have come to the counties ... Orthodox Christians are beaten and burned with various torments, monetary income and grain stocks will not be collected, the collected money treasury cannot be taken to Moscow because of their theft".
Only from this example it is obvious that it is not at all easy to investigate the “falsifications of history”. Moreover, within the framework of punitive, law enforcement structures. And even within the framework of civil official-public structures. Let us recall that in 2009 the Commission for Counteracting Attempts to Falsify History to the Prejudice of Russia's Interests was created. It consisted of 28 people, including representatives of the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Justice, the Interdepartmental Commission for the Protection of State Secrets, the Federal Security Service, the Foreign Intelligence Service ... And - three historians. The very name - “The Commission for Counteracting Attempts to Falsify History to the Prejudice of Russia's Interests”, which was not just unfortunate, but elementarily illiterate - discredited the goal and design. It turned out: if "in favor" - then it is possible to "falsify"?
The commission was quietly disbanded after 3 years, in May 2012. Its executive secretary, that is, a practical leader, was a former worker in the lighting department of the Ostankino television technical center, then an administrator of youth programs, host of Muzoboz, an activist of the Young Guard of United Russia, who made a career in the administrative and political sphere.
So, now the banner that has fallen from his hands will be raised by a certain conditional officer, the head of a special department of the Investigative Committee, a graduate of the Higher School of Police or the KGB-FSB? And he will establish the truth in the "case of Ivan Susanin" and send "to the zone" those who think and write differently?
Only here is a big hitch. Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Rehabilitation of Nazism" is based as a by-law on the internationally recognized legal document - the decisions of the Nuremberg Trials. The first paragraph of the article: "Denial of the facts established by the judgment of the International Military Tribunal..."
But there is no legal document that establishes what is "truth in history" neither in the world, nor in Russia. And, accordingly, there is no by-law, an article in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on responsibility for “falsifying history”. How to judge, how to pass sentences without the Criminal Code?
Hence, there are only two ways out.
The first is to leave history to scientists, historians, society
The second is to introduce such an article into the Criminal Code, which will finally make the officers of the Investigative Committee, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and prosecutors the owners of the historical truth of the last resort. As in "Woe From Wit" by Griboyedov:
I am a prince - to Gregory and you
Feldwebel in Voltaire will give...