In Crimea, the court system recently announced the sentencing of a Russian soldier for disobeying a direct order. The case was handled by the Crimean garrison military court, operating at the location of a military unit, and was reported by TASS through the court’s press service. Source: TASS.
On April 14, 2023, the Crimean garrison military court delivered its verdict concerning soldier Aleksandr Alexandrovich Minikin. The judicial board found that Minikin failed to comply with an order issued by his commander in the prescribed manner, a lapse that the court treated as a serious breach of duty under military law. The ruling reflects the military court system’s emphasis on maintaining rigorous discipline within units stationed in Crimea and nearby regions. Source: TASS.
Consequently, Minikin received a sentence that places him in a colony-settlement for a duration of two years. This outcome aligns with the penalties typically associated with disobedience to a superior officer within the military justice framework, underscoring the ongoing attention paid to command obedience in operational contexts. The court did not publish the full text of the decision on its website, a practice sometimes observed in sensitive or high-profile cases. Source: TASS.
Additional reports from Kommersant, referencing the Kursk garrison military court dating to April 6, provide details about two mobilizers, Yuri Degtyarev and Aleksey Selivanov. They received three-year prison terms for disobeying orders to participate in hostilities during Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine. According to the publication, both individuals admitted their wrongdoing and indicated willingness to take part in combat activities. This set of cases highlights how military authorities address breaches of duty that intersect with ongoing conflict operations and mobilization policies across regions. Source: Kommersant.
Together, these decisions illustrate the broader approach of military justice in handling cases of noncompliance with command directives during ongoing military operations. They reflect a strict interpretation of obedience requirements and the potential consequences for servicemen who fail to follow orders, especially when such orders relate to deployments and engagement in hostilities. The reporting underscores how regional courts communicate outcomes through official channels while balancing privacy and public accountability. Source: Combined reporting from TASS and Kommersant.