The Moscow prosecutor’s office is mounting a formal review of actor Alexei Panin in connection with accusations of publicly endorsing terrorist actions. This development was disclosed by TASS, the state news agency, signaling the start of a legal process that could unfold in the coming weeks.
The check is slated to occur before the close of September, with the possibility of extension if investigators deem additional time necessary to complete their assessment.
Should investigators find compelling evidence, Panin could be charged under Part 2 of Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This provision covers public calls for terrorist activities, the public disclosure of terrorism or terrorist propaganda, and the dissemination of such material through media or telecommunications networks, including the internet and other electronic platforms. Panin might also be examined under Part 2 of Article 280.1, which addresses public calls for actions that threaten the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, especially when such acts are carried out by someone who has already faced administrative responsibility for a similar act within the preceding year and conducted via media or electronic networks including the Internet.
A separate administrative route could be pursued under Part 1 of Article 20.3.3. This clause targets public actions aimed at discrediting the use of armed forces by the Russian authorities to protect national interests and the citizens of Russia.
Penalties under these provisions may include imprisonment. In particular, a combination of Part 2 of Article 205.2 with Part 2 of Article 280.1 could result in a prison sentence, while Part 1 of Article 20.3.3 allows for fines or other corrective measures. The ultimate penalty would depend on the court’s evaluation of the case details and the perceived severity of the alleged offenses, potentially combining jail time with financial penalties depending on the circumstances.
On August 2, Mash, a Telegram channel, reported that the Investigative Committee of Russia would also review Sobchak in connection with a joint discussion addressing the public justification of terrorism. This broadcast points to a wider review of statements from prominent figures regarding terrorism-related issues and national security concerns.
Earlier, Sobchak had replied to Mizulina’s request by expressing a willingness to discuss whether terrorism could ever be justified in certain theoretical contexts. That stance has drawn further scrutiny from both the public and officials, highlighting how public commentary on terrorism can influence opinions and national security discourse in Russia.