Which women should be released: experts have added to the list for amnesty

Public figures supported the initiative of HRC member Merkacheva

The meeting of members of the Presidential Human Rights Council with Vladimir Putin on Monday caused a great resonance. And, in particular, the topic of amnesty, which was raised by HRC member Eva Merkacheva. The human rights activist asked Putin to pardon all women who have committed non-violent crimes and who have minor children. The head of state supported this idea. “MK” found out from experts how justified the categories of imprisoned women subject to amnesty proposed at the HRC Council were.

“In addition to the categories voiced by Merkacheva, it is necessary to extend this amnesty to women who may even have adult but sick children,” the public ombudsman for the protection of entrepreneurs’ rights shares with MK Alexander Khurudzhi. – Also for those who have incapacitated parents who need to be looked after and treated. I think nothing prevents these two categories from being supplemented.

“From the point of view of our failing demographics, it’s probably worth taking such measures,” says a family policy expert, member of the scientific expert council under the Federation Council Commission on Family Law, in an interview with MK Elina Zhgutova. – Because, firstly, these are women of fertile age, they have minor children, i.e. These are non-fertile women, they can somehow increase our demographics. If we compare the benefits and harms, then, probably, this measure will not be so hopeless from the point of view of profane calculation.

“I believe that women who have committed a crime not related to violence against the individual and who have children should not be amnestied, but released from prison terms,” a member of the State Duma Committee on Family Protection, Issues of Paternity and Maternity shares with MK and childhood Vitaly Milonov. “They need to be released from arrest.” There are various crimes, sometimes extremely large-scale ones – corrupt officials are the same, and therefore I would not remove their criminal record, but would make it so that a woman could raise her child, based on her own experience and assessing her own mistakes. I would do this for humanistic purposes.

Women are generally not prone to violence. They often fall under the influence of their environment, their unlucky roommates, and circumstances. I think the very fact of being convicted and spending some time in prison is sufficient punishment for 99.9% of such women. There is no need to breed crime and crime where it can be painlessly eradicated for society.

“Of course, the measure is humane and correct,” says the ex-State Duma deputy. Vera Ganzya. – But non-violent crimes include, for example, economic ones. And if a woman robbed citizens or the state, then why should her sentence be commuted based on gender? Another question: punishments for less serious and more serious economic crimes do not differ too much, even, for example, in terms of imprisonment. This is a huge field of activity for legislators.

And finally, the most important thing. I think it is unacceptable to punish or even imprison someone for a different opinion or a careless word. And especially women! If we position ourselves as a democratic state, we must comply with this.

“I am a feminist and concerned about gender equality,” the human rights activist and writer told MK Maria Arbatova. – So the approach to liberation in connection with gender seems to me medieval savagery. In my opinion, prisoners who have minor children and have committed an offense for the first time, in whose cases there are no victims, or who are not against their release, may well be pardoned or transferred to house arrest, regardless of their gender.