The Krasnoyarsk Zheleznodorozhny District Court issued a ruling finding Polina Dvorkina guilty of an administrative offense under Article 20.3.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which governs incitement to hatred or enmity. As a consequence, she was fined ten thousand rubles, with the decision announced by the district court’s press service in clear terms to outline the charges and the sequence leading to the verdict.
According to the press service, the case centered on allegations that Dvorkina drafted and disseminated a manifesto that included quotes from feminist writings and urged women to commit violent acts against men. The document was allegedly sent to foreign media and to outlets or individuals deemed as foreign agents. The description portrays the content as inciting hostility in a way that surpassed permissible limits for public communication, according to the authorities.
In addition to the manifesto-related accusations, the court order noted that Dvorkina appeared in public wearing a T-shirt bearing a slogan promoting hostile actions toward boys. The court treated this act as part of the same legal matter, contributing to the overall evaluation of intent and the potential impact of her actions on public order and social harmony. The press service quoted the court as stating that the penalty for these offenses consisted of a 10,000 ruble fine.
The case also involved a violent incident linked to the accused. On a specified day, the individual was described as approaching a kindergarten while carrying a pistol concealed beneath clothing. A physical education teacher intervened, restraining the person and bringing them to the ground until law enforcement arrived. During subsequent questioning, the individual expressed a stated intent to kill boys, a declaration that heightened concerns about dangers to children and school environments. Law enforcement officers subsequently recovered a shotgun and a quantity of ammunition at the scene, underscoring the seriousness of the conduct under review. The proceedings and accompanying statements underscore authorities’ emphasis on safeguarding minors and ensuring public safety in community spaces.
In summary, the district court’s ruling reflects a focus on preventing harm and maintaining social order in light of alleged incitement, public demonstrations of hostility, and threats toward children in proximity to educational settings. The case illustrates how authorities interpret and apply provisions aimed at preventing hate speech and violence, while also highlighting the broader context of public safety and the protection of minors in daily life. This development serves as a reminder for residents of the region, as well as observers in neighboring jurisdictions, of the vigilance exercised by judicial and law enforcement bodies in matters touching on extremist rhetoric, gendered hostility, and acts of potential violence in public spaces.