A new examination in the case of Berkovich and Petriychuk found a “romantic image of a terrorist” in the play “Finist Yasny Falcon”

“Kommersant” has at its disposal a new examination in the case of director Evgenia Berkovich and playwright Svetlana Petriychuk, accused of justifying terrorism in the play “Finist Yasny Falcon”. Svetlana Mochalova, an employee of the FSB expert service, concluded that the accused specifically created a “romantic image of a terrorist” in the play in order to make him “interesting and attractive to girls and women.” The FSB expert also reproached the playwright and director for discriminating against Russian men. Finally, she stated that the sharia marriage mentioned in the play “implies various forms of polyamory” and “virtually guarantees the impossibility of a woman returning to traditional family life.” The defense of the accused is outraged by the quality of the examination.

Let us remind you that the play “Finist Yasny Falcon” was written by playwright Svetlana Petriychuk in 2019. The author talks about the fate of Russian women recruited by radical Islamists on dating sites. The play uses protocols of real interrogations and court proceedings – in particular, in the case of student Varvara Karaulova, who in 2016 received 4.5 years in prison for attempting to participate in a terrorist organization (Part 1 of Article 30 and Part 2 of Article 205.5 of the Criminal Code RF). At the same time, the play contains deliberately fairy-tale motifs: the main character Maryushka wanted to escape to her terrorist lover Finist Yasny Sokol in a certain Far Away Kingdom; From time to time the characters switch from modern language to the language of fairy tales and epics. In 2020, director Evgeniya Berkovich staged a play based on the play, which in 2022 received two Golden Mask awards for the best work of a costume designer and the best work of a playwright.

In the spring of 2023, the Investigative Committee opened a criminal case on the justification of terrorism in plays and performances (Part 2 of Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Svetlana Petriychuk and Evgenia Berkovich were arrested and sent to a pre-trial detention center. At the trial, it turned out that the accusation was based on an examination prepared by the head of the “laboratory of destruction” of Moscow State Linguistic University. Maurice Thorez Roman Silantiev and Director of the Center for Linguistic Expertise of the Moscow State Linguistic University Galina Khizrieva. They claimed that the playwright and director were glorifying ISIS (a terrorist organization banned on the territory of the Russian Federation). Later, the Russian Federal Center for Forensic Expertise under the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation officially announced that “comprehensive destructive forensic examination” cannot be included in the list of forensic examinations due to its unscientific nature. Nevertheless, the court refused to reduce the measure of restraint for the accused, and the investigation ordered a new examination.

As Kommersant found out, in the fall of 2023 it was conducted by Svetlana Mochalova, senior forensic expert of the expert unit of the Federal Security Service of Russia for the Sverdlovsk Region. A philologist by training, she has repeatedly prepared examinations on “extremist” cases. Among other things, in 2012, Ms. Mochalova analyzed the statements of 23-year-old Muslim Elvira Sultanakhmetova, who on social networks called the New Year celebration “vile paganism.” Subsequently, the girl was found guilty of “inciting hatred or enmity based on attitudes towards religion” (Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and was sentenced to 120 hours of compulsory labor. This case caused a great stir in the Russian Muslim community.

At the beginning of the examination, Svetlana Mochalova reminds that her task is “linguistic, not legal qualification of statements.” The document then cites numerous pages of play text and performance transcripts. The FSB expert believes that Svetlana Petriychuk and Evgenia Berkovich set as their goal the justification of terrorism, for which they “use various methods of persuasion” of viewers and readers. Thus, “the romantic image of a militant (terrorist), represented in the image of Finist the Clear Falcon, is imbued with high emotions and mentality, as well as the idealization of a holy war, which determines the so-called aesthetics of jihad.” According to Ms. Mochalova, it is not without reason that the character of Maryushka talks in the play about the “exceptionalism” of terrorists and their “incompatibility with the everyday world” – this “makes their image interesting and attractive to girls and women.”

The examination states several times that the play “unambiguously characterizes Russian men negatively.” “The glorification of militants (terrorists) is based on contrasting assessments with Russian men, who are represented negatively by playwright Petriychuk and director Berkovich. Throughout the play and performance, in the communicative (speech) behavior of the characters, there is no description of Russian men in a positive modality,” writes Ms. Mochalova. As an example, she cites a quote from a character in the play who talks about a family quarrel: “Our men are best at doing three things – criticizing, giving advice and assigning guilt.”

Expert Mochalova points out that in order to justify terrorism, it is necessary to assess the terrorist action “as corresponding in this case to a religious norm.” In her opinion, it was for this purpose that the playwright and director inserted instructions into the play, “how to enter into an Islamic marriage on Skype, how to tie an Islamic headscarf, what is halal food, how to make a halal chocolate cake.” Another part of the examination states: “We note that the phenomenon of Muslim “Sharia” marriage is a relationship between a man (most often a militant) and a woman (a potential terrorist) that is not regulated by law, based on a free interpretation of Sharia norms and implying various forms of polyamory between the “wife.” and other members of the terrorist group. The main feature of such a “marriage” is the virtually guaranteed impossibility of a woman returning to the mainstream of traditional family life, her rejection in society, which puts a woman on the only possible path of revenge for her dead “husband” and repeated “marriages.” It is interesting that exactly the same opinion is expressed in the play itself by the character of the Judge: “They (terrorists.— “Kommersant”) they even came up with a special concept to fuck with just anyone, but morally it’s all a secret. These women come there for “sex jihad”, go through hundreds of militants in a couple of years – and is this a sacred mission? Yes, this is depravity as it is.” This passage is also quoted in the examination.

Ms. Mochalova concludes: “for potential audiences,” Maryushka “is an image that should be imitated.” The main character of the play “refers to the traditional folklore image of the positive heroine Maryushka, for whom the path to the Far Far Away Kingdom is the initiation of growing up, when social and personal status changes, when Maryushka from a girl turns into a bride or wife of Finist: from an obedient daughter she grows up to the savior of her beloved” . The expert emphasizes that Maryushka’s “journey” “is fateful, it cannot be canceled, avoided or postponed.” The playwright and director are also accused of “representing the external and internal state of Maryushka, who does not repent, but, on the contrary, demonstrates steadfastness and steadfastness in her religious beliefs and attitude towards Finist the Clear Falcon.”

“From the context of the materials under study, it follows that Maryushka is aware that her Finist Yasny Sokol is an active participant in an international terrorist organization (ISIS, ISIS, Daesh), recognized as a terrorist organization and banned on the territory of the Russian Federation. But nevertheless, she wants to move to him on the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic,” writes Ms. Mochalova. And he concludes that the play and performance contain “justification for terrorist activities.” According to the FSB expert, the play can create “a desire or motivation to carry out illegal (terrorist) activities.”

Let us note that the conclusions of Svetlana Mochalova are similar to the conclusions of the “destructological examination” of Roman Silantyev and Galina Khizrieva. However, the first examination stated that the performance also contained signs of the ideology of Hizb ut-Tahrir and Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun, banned in Russia, as well as the ideology of “radical feminism – the fight against the androcentric social order in Russia.” Experts also found in the play signs of inciting hostility based on the male gender.

Lawyer Ksenia Karpinskaya, defending Evgenia Berkovich, told Kommersant that she was outraged by the quality of the new examination. “The expert’s conclusion that “Finist the Clear Falcon” is a folk tale, which means women will watch it and begin to commit terrorist acts, is absurd,” she said. “The expert herself is a woman who also watched this performance, but nothing of the sort.” committed.” Ms. Karpinskaya added that she was shocked by the “expert’s attitude toward Muslim customs.” She believes that the interpretation of Muslim marriage in the examination is aimed at inciting interreligious hatred: “In itself, she (FSB expert) is a Muslim marriage. “Kommersant”) calls a marriage between a militant and a potential terrorist. This is simply outrageous, since such a marriage in itself has nothing to do with either terrorists or militants.”

Svetlana Petriychuk’s defender, lawyer Sergei Badamshin, did not comment on the new examination to Kommersant. “Excessive attention to an unsuitable object distracts us from the main thing. To understand that there is no justification or propaganda of terrorism in the case, it is enough just to see this performance; there is no need for translation from Russian into Russian. This is obvious to everyone, regardless of religion and nationality,” the defense lawyer explained.

“The conclusions of the examination are based on direct ignorance of the main difference between the play and political journalism – it is an artistic text,” says forensic expert, member of the Amicus Curiae project for studying Russian forensics Dmitry Dubrovsky (included in the register of foreign agents). “Thus, it is quite possible to convict Pushkin or Kuprin for anti-Semitism, and Dostoevsky for promoting the murder of old women.”

Emilia Gabdulina, Alexander Chernykh